New Contenders in the Editorial Systems Market - Impressed

Editorial Systems 

New Contenders in the 

Editorial Systems Market 

BY STEVE EDWARDS 

Faced with fierce challenges to its decade-long domination, Quark has countered 

with an outdated Version 3 of QPS. Is the QPS era over? The editorial landscape is 

changing elsewhere, too, as Net-linx buries its SII heritage and other suppliers 

scramble to adapt to new realities. 

The Quark Publishing System has had an 

amazingly long run. Introduced in 1992, 

QPS has steadily built up a customer 

base that reached 900 sites last November, 

according to Quark’s own statistics. 

But Quark’s software had been stuck on various 

iterations of Version 2 since 1998, leaving customers 

frustrated on numerous grounds. At a basic level, QPS 

lacked support for Macintosh OS X and even Quark’s 

own Xpress 6, although these shortcomings have been 

rectified in Version 3, released officially on August 31. 

But other long-desired additions to system functionality 

await a further revision, which might be too long for 

some people to wait. 

For example, in addition to “compatibility” issues, 

QPS customers have been frustrated by the lack of a 

multitier architecture supporting a standard relational 

database and using XML natively for messaging and 

external communications. Customers also have been 

asking for a browser interface for querying the system 

and checking files in and out, a facility for handling 

story jumps, server-based preferences, and the ability 

to store preferences with a user’s logon rather than 

tying them to a client workstation. Many have also 

wanted the option of using InCopy and InDesign as an 

alternative to CopyDesk and Xpress for editing and 

pagination — an enhancement not likely to come from 

Quark. 

Until recently, people looking for more up-to-date 

alternatives to QPS haven’t had many options. Softcare’s 

K4 has been installed in more than 40 sites 

worldwide, and Van Gennep’s PlanSystem3 has a couple 

of enviable reference customers in Reader’s Digest 

of North America and PrismaPresse in France. Both 

systems have been targeted primarily at the magazine 

market. As we reported from America East 2004 (see 

The Seybold Report, Vol. 4, No. 2), some of the suppliers 

of newspaper systems see the QPS market as ripe 

for plucking, including Atex, which dominated the 

magazine market before QPS arrived, and Baseview, 

which has installed more newspaper systems than any 

other supplier. 

Enter Modulo and Woodwing. Two more systems, both 

based on modern architecture and designed with the 

needs of QPS users in mind, are targeted squarely at 

the same market as QPS. Modulo Systems has had 

more experience working with QPS and its customers 

than anyone else, perhaps even Quark. Modulo’s new 

system is called Concerto. The other is from Woodwing 

Software, which has a similarly impressive history 

working with products from Quark’s competitor, 

Adobe Systems. Woodwing’s new offering is an upscale 

model in its Smart Connection series, called Smart 

Connection Enterprise (SC Enterprise). 

Both Concerto and SC Enterprise are built around 

a true SQL database with good support for XML and 

provide an alternative to CopyDesk and Xpress for 

editing and pagination. Concerto offers a choice of 

CopyDesk-Xpress or InCopy-InDesign so that current 

Quark users can start with a Quark-based Concerto 

system and switch later to InDesign. SC Enterprise supports 

only InCopy and InDesign, but its purchase price 

of about $1,000 per seat (not counting installation 

charges) is much lower than either QPS 3 or Concerto. 

Concerto and SC Enterprise have already been 

installed at a few customer sites. We contacted a couple 

of early users to check on their experiences to date but 

decided that it is a bit too soon to get meaningful feedback, 

although we expect to receive full cooperation 

for such a project in a few months. 

Our scope: QPS market and beyond. In this report, which 

covers recent trends in the editorial system market, 

we’ll begin with detailed introductions to Concerto 

and SC Enterprise, follow with an update on Quark’s 

release of QPS Classic 3, and conclude with coverage 

of some other systems that have been in the news lately, 

including a new system from Net-linx based on 

technology acquired from Seinet of Spain, plus the 

Headline Web publishing system being carved out of 

the merger of Wilkenson Scoop and Bombus, as well as 

brief notes on APT, Pongrass, AMC, Baseview, Unisys 

and Tansa. We won’t cover Softcare’s K4 (which was 

featured in an article earlier this year) or Van Gennep’s 

6 October 6, 2004 • The Seybold Report • Analyzing Publishing Technologies • © 2004 Seybold Publications

PlanSystem3, which didn’t appear at Nexpo but 

should be ready for review soon. 

Modulo Debuts New System, 

Announces Quasar Relationship 

Modulo Systems owes its founding and continued existence 

to serving the QPS market, so it isn’t surprising 

that the first complete system it developed addresses 

the desires of QPS users for a “new generation” system. 

The new Modulo system, called Concerto, offers 

true cross-platform functionality and an SQL database, 

supports both Quark and Adobe programs for 

editing and pagination, and uses XML as its command 

protocol for messaging and communications — items 

most requested by QPS users that also should provide 

a strong foundation for the broad market. 

In addition to Concerto, Modulo also announced 

at Nexpo a deal with Quasar Technologies of Spain 

that brings Modulo some important technology and a 

full Web-based InDesign product suite that it otherwise 

would have had to develop itself. 

Designed for flexibility. Based on wide-area network, 

multitier architecture, Concerto supports distributed 

workgroups, multiple servers and the ability to scale 

from tens to many hundreds of seats. Client software 

runs on both Macintosh (OS 9 and OS X) and Windows 

computers and supports InCopy-InDesign and 

CopyDesk-Xpress, giving users a choice that isn’t 

available with QPS or two of Concerto’s presumed 

competitors, Softcare’s K4 and Woodwing’s new Smart 

Connection Enterprise, both of which support only 

InCopy and InDesign. (Modulo’s flexibility here helps 

keep pace with the trend in newspaper editorial systems, 

which tend to offer both Adobe and Quark 

options.) Besides the Adobe- and Quark-based clients, 

access to the system will be available using a browser, 

with two levels of functionality (see below). 

Concerto also includes the Adobe Graphics Server 

to produce proofs, FPO images, high-resolution output 

formats and final page PDFs. Content is stored in a 

relational database system by reference to both an 

external file system and an XML repository, which 

Modulo supplies through a partnership with Ixiasoft. 

Newspaper planning and scheduling software will be 

provided through the Quasar deal and Modulo’s own 

development. 

Workflow. Concerto provides customizable workflow 

features, including “channels” (hot folders), baskets, 

statuses and agents to automate the flow of data and 

performance of tasks. Channels, which can be configured 

for specific users or needs, automate certain 

processes early in the workflow, such as the batch 

check-in of wire service photographs. When a file is 

placed in a channel, it automatically enters the system 

and is given a default header with standard metadata 

for that channel. Preview images or text samples are 

also generated automatically, and the file is ready for 

querying, previewing or editing. 

Baskets and statuses enable the use of scripts 

(JavaScript or Visual Basic) to trigger specified actions 

on a file that enters or exits the basket or status. (Apple- 

Script can be used on Macintosh clients for local scripting.) 

Actions that can be triggered include copying files, 

changing metadata and creating a PDF version for a 

preview or proof. Alternatively, agents can be used 

instead of scripts to trigger frequently performed tasks 

based on the results of specific queries or file types 

according to predefined schedules. Agents are used to 

archive files and purge data, among other tasks. 

Composer clients. Concerto will offer a choice of main 

clients: Concerto Composer for Adobe InDesign, built 

around InCopy and InDesign, and Concerto Composer 

for Quark Xpress, built around CopyDesk and 

Xpress. The basic editing and pagination functionality 

comes standard from Adobe and Quark, with good 

facilities for writing to fit in either case, but with critical 

differences in areas such as XML support and composition 

quality, where Adobe has significant 

advantages. Besides features supplied by Adobe and 

Quark, Modulo offers Adobe plug-ins and Quark 

Xtensions to enable predefined styles to aid in the rapid 

creation of text boxes or other rough layouts. 

All Concerto applications allow the querying of all 

content types, as well as metadata, including multiple 

criteria per query. Queries can examine the name and 

type of files, header fields and so on. The results of a 

query can be displayed with up to 256 text characters 

typically per asset or 50 per item when using the Web 

application. 

Harmony browser. Concerto will offer two browser 

clients. Harmony, which was developed by Modulo 

and is available now, serves as the interface for handling 


InDesign link 

notification. This is 

the message an 

InDesign user 

receives when 

opening a layout 

that contains an 

article or image that 

has been modified. 

Note (1) the 

Concerto palette 

(top right) that 

displays the results 

of the query and 

includes both Quark 

Xpress and InDesign 

layouts (as 

distinguished by the 

icon next to each 

layout); (2) the 

check-out icon next 

to the open layout 

(the third item, 

named Inc.indd, in 

the same Concerto 

palette); (3) the 

Links palette 

(bottom right), 

which lists both the 

article and the 

image, with an 

“alert” icon next to 

the article indicating 

that it is the 

modified item; and 

(4) the notification 

to the InDesign user 

that the layout may 

be updated now or 

later. 

Volume 4, Number 13 • The Seybold Report • Analyzing Publishing Technologies 7


Browser client for 

administration. 

Modulo’s new 

Concerto system is 

built around an SQL 

database and uses a 

browser client called 

Harmony to handle 

administrative 

functions. 

administrative functions and provides remote editorial 

access to the content database. Through it, administrators 

can configure the system, view a list of all loggedon 

users and the applications they are running, search 

the log of all XML commands that have been executed, 

monitor the status of pages, handle archiving, and set 

up and manage groups and users with access privileges 

and permissions. (Permissions can be based either on 

system functions or on content, with overrides available 

for individuals within a group.) 

Harmony also enables reporters and editors to 

query the database, preview layouts, check stories out 

for editing, and create and submit stories. To create a 

story, a reporter can use Harmony’s rudimentary text 

editor, which produces a flat text file without hyphenation 

and justification (with the option of embedding 

XML tags), or write the story using Word (or CopyDesk 

or InCopy) and submit it as a Harmony attachment. 

If a story has already been assigned to a layout, it 

cannot be edited to fit the layout using Harmony itself 

unless the user has CopyDesk or InCopy running locally 

for this purpose and checks articles out remotely. 

However, Modulo is working on two options to enable 

writing to fit. One is an interface between Word and 

both Xpress and InDesign, which would enable text to 

be sent to an H&J server and returned to Word with 

the results of H&J displayed in Word. This approach 

depends on the availability of a server version of the 

layout program, which is already possible with Xpress 

using Quark’s Dynamic Document Server and is 

expected to be offered in the future by Adobe for InDesign. 

The other copyfitting option is the forthcoming 

Quasar browser for InDesign (see below). Modulo said 

it is also working on an agreement with AdLizard to 

enable remote composition using InDesign. 

Other functions of Harmony are to review highresolution 

images (a key requirement of one of Concerto’s 

early users) and to view finished pages in PDF. 

Quasar browser. To be able to offer a remote client with 

interactive composition capabilities, Modulo is looking 

to Quasar, which is already supplying such technology. 

Serving much like the “self-service” ad-building stations 

now coming into the mainstream advertising market, 

it enables a client to access a remote server for 

designing and composing jobs. Thus, it will handle not 

only interactive H&J for reporters and editors, but also 

remote editorial page layout and the possibility of unattended 

ad building by advertisers. 

We haven’t seen the Quasar remote functionality 

yet, but we’ve been told that it has been installed at a 

customer site for eventual use in designing and producing 

corporate magazines. (See “Quasar,” below.) 

Sonata standalone client. Modulo offers another client, 

called Sonata, that provides querying and content 

management functions for files created by third-party 

applications such as Adobe Photoshop and Illustrator. 

It recognizes files based on their file types, checks them 

out and opens them in their native applications. After 

editing, files are checked back in, system files are 

updated, previews generated, etc. 

Concerto pricing and status. Concerto pricing is based on 

a server license fee ranging from $27,000 to $40,000 

and a per-seat charge of $1,250 to $2,750 for a fullfunction 

client (less for a Harmony browser client). Five 

systems have been installed at sites that currently use 

QPS. The first, a major magazine, has installed a 16seat 

configuration using CopyDesk and Xpress. Two 

medium-circulation newspapers each installed about 

100-seat systems. The other two sites are a Canadian 

financial services business and a small publisher of 

magazines and catalogs. All have been installed, but 

none are in full production, so it was too early to solicit 

feedback on system performance. We contacted magazine 

publisher TL Enterprises and the Arizona Star 

newspaper, and both seemed optimistic about the 

prospects and offered to provide us with comments 

after their systems have been put into full production. 

Initial releases of Concerto support InCopy, InDesign, 

CopyDesk and Xpress, although some functions 

(e.g story jumps and built-in Xpress-to-XML conversions) 

won’t be supported until the second release. 

Release 1.5 will add features for cross-media publishing 

and font management, plus support for Adobe CS 

2 and Quark DDS. Release 2.0 will include edition 

management and complete integration with Modulo’s 

advertising system, called Symphony. No dates have 

been announced for those versions. 

Quasar. The deal with Quasar gives Modulo nonexclusive 

worldwide rights (exclusive in the Americas) to 

market the Quasar GetReady system developed in 

Spain and now in use at one customer site in France 

and another in Spain. Modulo plans to use the Quasar 

technology to integrate parts into Concerto, as noted 

8 October 6, 2004 • The Seybold Report • Analyzing Publishing Technologies

above, and as a standalone system for customers who 

don’t need the full functionality of Concerto, such as 

advertising agencies that need the interactive remote 

client functionality. 

Modulo didn’t exhibit the Quasar system at 

Nexpo, saying it would take six months to get it ready 

for the market. 

One of Quasar’s two customers, PSA Peugeot Citroën, 

is planning to use it to create and produce 15 corporate 

magazines. Editors and reporters at locations 

inside and outside France will connect to a server to 

access a page template database, graphics and photos, 

as well as an automated production system running 

InDesign. Initially, the system will be used for internal 

communication among 15 industrial sites in France. 

Later, it will be adapted for producing the magazines of 

technical departments, third parties and industries 

based in France and elsewhere. 

Quasar will continue to sell GetReady through its 

own channels and retains the rights to deal with other 

integrators. Modulo said it has no plans for Quasar to 

sell the Concerto products that result from the integration 

of the two technologies. 

Tools from Ixiasoft, Siftology. Modulo also has signed 

two deals relating to text storage and searching. First, 

Modulo has obtained the rights to resell and distribute 

Ixiasoft’s TextML XML Server and search engine. 

TextML Server, which Modulo is integrating with 

Concerto and Symphony, as well as selling separately, 

indexes XML documents and XMP-tagged photos and 

manages content without altering the native files. Most 

notable is its fast retrieval, based on its advanced 

indexing and query language. It also controls backup 

versions of files, complementing Concerto’s own capabilities. 

Modulo is working to make the user interface 

more like Concerto’s. 

The second deal is with Siftology, the developer of 

search technology that locates stories that resemble a 

target story. The product from Modulo, called 

Amadeus, starts by analyzing and indexing all articles 

as they enter the database. Siftology won’t disclose 

how it works, but said the engine has been “pretrained” 

with 10 years’ worth of newspaper stories to 

aid in establishing relationships based on the meaning 

of the content. In operation, a reporter or editor typically 

performs a keyword search to find a story that is 

representative of the type of content that is sought. 

Amadeus then finds all the articles that are similar to 

the reference article, taking into account both the analytical 

data and additional search parameters, such as 

dates of publication, bylines, etc. 

Modulo and the market. It might seem that the arrival of 

Concerto would spell the end of the Modulo-QPS relationship. 

After all, Concerto was designed to cater to 

the needs of QPS users wanting to upgrade their systems, 

and Quark has a reputation for making it diffi- 

cult for companies both to work with Quark and compete 

with it. But there might be more to the situation 

than meets the eye. 

Modulo wants to offer QPS upgrades to companies 

currently using QPS that aren’t ready to add a 

complete new system like Concerto, so offering QPS 

upgrades as an alternative to Concerto makes business 

sense for Modulo. 

And Quark, to the surprise of many, has made 

changes in top management that appear to open the 

way to partnerships that might have been unthinkable 

not long ago. One new development is the formation 

of an OEM group that has HP as its first customer, creating 

a potentially significant new market. If Quark is 

serious about broadening its approach, a similar 

arrangement with Modulo, once the nurturer of 863 

QPS customers, could make sense. It might help Quark 

retain more QPS customers than would remain without 

Modulo’s involvement. 

In any event, we haven’t been told of any impending 

changes in the Quark-Modulo relationship. (In 

fact, for this article, Modulo didn’t state anything 

about its past, current or future business relationship 

with Quark, suggesting that the two companies might 

be discussing a new agreement.) 

Such a scenario would give Modulo a product line 

that includes the following: 

• QPS Classic 3, primarily for customers that want 

to upgrade from Version 2 but are not ready to 

purchase a completely new system. 

• Concerto, which is expected to cost somewhat 

more than QPS and offer substantially greater 

functionality. By supporting CopyDesk and 

Xpress, as well as InCopy and InDesign, Modulo 

smoothes the transition between QPS and Concerto 

by allowing customers to buy Concerto, use it 

with CopyDesk and Xpress initially, and later 


Query results. 

Remote users of the 

Concerto system can 

use the Harmony 

browser client to 

query the database 

and get this view of 

the results. Below 

the photos are 

color-coded statuses, 

e.g., New, Used, 

Edit, Final to layout 

and Archive to XML. 



Article property sheet. 

This article, being 

created, has the 

properties shown 

here in this 

customizable dialog. 

Many of these items 

are pulldown menus 

that can be used to 

change a property, 

such as changing a 

state to “ready” and 

moving the article 

to the next basket. It 

is also possible to 

change the state of 

an article without 

opening it. 

switch to InCopy and InDesign. (In Europe, Modulo 

will sell various “flavors” of Concerto.) 

• GetReady, the Quasar system with interactive 

remote composition for remote ad design and 

some other applications suited to this functionality. 

• Modulo also has a range of advertising products 

that aren’t the subject of this discussion. 

Modulo said its goal is to combine the Quasar 

products with its own offerings into a single line “that 

covers the full spectrum of publishing from concept to 

print and the Internet,” from newspapers and magazines 

to catalogs, advertising agencies and corporate 

publishing. 

A few questions remain before that strategy can 

move forward. First, we haven’t heard Quark bless the 

idea of Modulo handling both QPS and Concerto. Second, 

it’s too soon to predict the future of QPS, not only 

the Version 3 upgrade, which has just been introduced, 

but also another version, possibly coming later (see 

Quark, below, for more on QPS). Third, we haven’t 

seen the integration of the Quasar technology with 

Concerto, which is needed for newspaper planning and 

scheduling, as well as remote client technology with 

InDesign, all of which could have a significant impact 

on Modulo’s success. 

In addition, many other system suppliers have their 

eyes on the QPS market, including Woodwing, which 

debuted its attractively priced Smart Connection 

Enterprise at Nexpo, and a host of suppliers of newspaper 

systems, any of which would love to have a 

small piece of the QPS market. 

Woodwing Moves Up-Market 

with SC Enterprise 

Woodwing Software, whose Smart Connection tech- 

nology has played a critical role in InDesign’s successful 

penetration of the newspaper and magazine markets, 

has taken an important step forward with the 

release of a database-driven editorial system that is 

scalable to support large workgroups. Called Smart 

Connection Enterprise, it is an open-source, upscale 

version of the company’s earlier Smart Connection systems, 

which have been installed in more than 200 sites, 

typically ranging up to 30 seats. Woodwing now offers 

three Smart Connection systems (Light, Pro and Enterprise) 

in addition to supplying Smart Connection technology 

on an OEM basis. 

The Enterprise system is targeted at a variety of 

applications, including magazine and newspaper publishers, 

as well as ad agencies and book publishers — 

about the same market as Quark’s QPS, Modulo’s 

Concerto and Softcare’s K4. Key characteristics of 

Smart Connection Enterprise include its low cost, open 

architecture, customizability, and use of InCopy and 

InDesign (but not Xpress) for its core publishing functionality. 

Like those competitors, Enterprise is being 

sold through a global network of resellers and integrators. 

Marketing and support are handled by Woodwing, 

which has its headquarters in The Netherlands 

and a U.S. office in Detroit. 

Architecture. Smart Connection Enterprise is designed 

around a three-tier architecture (client, application server 

and database). The default database is open-source 

MySQL, but SC Enterprise also supports Microsoft 

SQL and other common SQL databases. (Non-SQL 

databases can be connected via PHP scripting.) 

The server runs under Windows, Mac OS X, Linux 

and Solaris. XML is the communication protocol, 

enabling integration with back-end or content management 

systems using SC Enterprise’s SOAP interface, 

which can work with other content management systems’ 

APIs. Woodwing said one of its early Enterprise 

customers has integrated the system with Documentum 

in this fashion. 

A distinguishing feature of the architecture is that 

the business logic (which determines which actions are 

allowed, which actions trigger other actions, etc.) is 

centralized on the application server and can be customized 

using PHP scripting. (In contrast, many systems 

encapsulate part of the business logic in the client 

where it can’t be customized.) 

SC Enterprise is also flexible in its handling of 

metadata. It supports Adobe’s XMP and enables the 

user to create new metadata fields. It’s possible to 

define which fields are used in system dialogs (including 

whether they are mandatory or not), which ones 

are shown in database views, etc. 

Workflow. SC Enterprise works on the basis of a publication 

hierarchy encompassing issues, sections and articles 

(or whatever terms the user chooses to substitute), 

with a customizable workflow aimed to accommodate 


newspaper, magazine and newsletter applications. 

“Baskets” are employed for each task within the workflow, 

such as jobs to be edited or corrected, jobs that are 

ready, etc. Menus set up the sequence in which articles 

(or components of articles, such as captions, photos, 

sidebars, etc.) move through baskets. 

As articles proceed through the workflow, they are 

sent to the next basket by the person finishing the last 

task, either by issuing a “ready” command from within 

InCopy, which saves the article, closes it and moves it to 

the next status, or by sending the article to the next stage 

using a pulldown menu with a “send to” command. 

One interesting point is that an unlimited number 

of actions can be evoked when a given state is selected. 

This could include dynamic creation of a PDF file, an 

automated notification by e-mail (outside the system) 

to another participant in the workflow, automatic 

archival and a dynamic pass-off of InCopy XML content 

to a content management system, all achieved at 

the application layer, with no dependency on the desktop 

plug-ins. 

Each article has a property sheet that lists its routing 

and status information, plus comments entered by 

staff. 

As work flows through the system, new versions of 

stories are automatically created at certain points, such 

as every time a file is sent to another basket or when it 

is checked in by either an InCopy or an InDesign user. 

Multiple publications can be worked on concurrently. 

Clients: local and remote. For the main system operations, 

two client applications are available: one for editors, 

based on InCopy, and one for page designers, 

based on InDesign. In addition, Woodwing offers two 

options for remote access using a standard Web browser. 

One of these, called WebApps, requires no special 

software in the remote computer and enables browser 

access to the database for writing and submitting stories, 

checking files in and out, and handling system 

administration, among other functions. 

The second remote application, called Remote 

Module, can perform H&J against the layout of InDesign 

pages, which it does by running InCopy locally 

rather than by sending the text to an H&J server at the 

host site and retrieving the text with its H&J results. To 

be able to write to fit the InDesign layout, the remote 

computer needs layout information, which typically 

with InCopy and InDesign requires working with a 

large file. However, with Remote Module, Woodwing 

encapsulates the data in a “thin” InCopy file that a 

reporter or editor can take on the road, retrieve over 

the Internet or receive as an e-mail attachment. The file 

includes enough information to enable accurate H&J 

for copyfitting and to provide a preview of the page 

layout. When the remote writer or editor is finished, 

the revised file can be sent back electronically for incorporation 

back into the workflow. 

Because the remote user has to have InCopy running 

locally, this approach would work very well on a 

home computer or a laptop that is taken regularly on 

the road, but it wouldn’t work at an Internet café or on 

computers not preloaded with InCopy. 

Both WebApps and Remote Module are standard, 

no-extra-cost capabilities of the SC Enterprise system, 

although the latter obviously requires purchasing 

InCopy. 

All clients support extensive querying functionality, 

including the ability to perform searches based on 

the file name, status, contents (including the use of a 

full-text search), the name of the reporter or editor 

who created or modified a story, the dates the story 

was created or modified, copyright information, a 

comment field and so on. Predefined queries can be 

stored under a query name and accessed with a single 

click. These named queries are stored under the user’s 

logon, accessible from any computer. Queries can be 

initiated through the client interface or by using SQL 

statements, which provides a powerful development 

tool that can help distribute administration of the system 

from the production department to an IT person. 

Besides InCopy and InDesign, other application 

software is being integrated natively into Enterprise, 

starting with Photoshop and Illustrator. In addition, SC 

Enterprise can “manage” other objects, such as Word 

and Excel files, and even movies or sound. These “managed” 

files reside in the system, with metadata, and are 

supported by Enterprise’s versioning capability. 

Administration. System administration functions, which 

are accessed through the browser-based WebApps 

module, include defining user- and group-based access 

rights and permissions, setting up workflows, monitoring 

status, controlling the issues and sections of publications, 

and viewing management information in the 

form of pie charts, bar charts, etc. A user can be part of 

any number of groups. Access rights can apply independently 

to publications, sections, statuses, object 

types and accessible functions (read, write, delete, etc.). 

Woodwing’s customization capabilities apply to 

WebApps, which enable customizing both the user 


Queries. 

SC Enterprise has 

extensive querying 

facilities, including 

the ability to set up 

named queries for 

re-use, as is being 

done here. Most of 

the items shown are 

pulldown menus 

that help to select 

where to search, the 

type of query, etc. 



Smart Connection 

palette. The Smart 

Connection palette 

can be run in 

browse or query 

mode. In this view, 

browsing the WW 

News issue 

generated this 

listing of items. The 

first item, an image, 

is highlighted, which 

produced the 

preview at the 

bottom. Note the 

three palettes at the 

top and the 

pulldown menus 

below, which are 

characteristic of 


Enterprise. The 

order of columns 

and items within 

columns can be 

customized. 

interface via HTML templates and WebApps functionality 

using PHP scripting. It is possible to develop new 

applications for the WebApps module. 

Palettes. The key to day-to-day production are the three 

palettes Enterprise adds to InDesign: the Smart Connection, 

Elements and Element Label palettes. They 

use a combination of pulldown menus, “context” 

menus that change according to the situation, and buttons 

that trigger common functions. 

The Smart Connection palette (see photo below) 

gives an overview of articles, images and layout files 

associated with the current publication, generated 

either by “browsing” or “querying” the database. The 

resulting display of articles and files appears in column 

format across the top, with an area across the bottom 

to display a preview of whichever item is highlighted. 

The Elements palette (see photo on page 13) lists 

all assets on a page, with up to 10 types of information 

about each, in column format. It includes their status in 

the workflow, the basket they belong to, the editor 

who is working on them, the type of file, the page to 

which the item has been assigned, the first few lines of 

text (if it’s a text file), checkout status and so on. This 

palette also indicates when a page has been checked 

out for layout (the text can still be edited) or when an 

editor has changed a file and it is ready for its next step 

in the workflow. A nice feature of the Elements palette 

is that items can be organized in various ways, such as 

by article or alphabetically by name. 

During the editorial process, a messaging facility 

allows users to send messages to one another. Messages 

pop up in a box on the screen when the recipient is 

logged in. 

The third palette, Element Label, is used to apply 

“labels” to stories, such as body, byline, caption or 

credit. To simplify the process, each text item starts 

with a default label that can be changed using a pull- 

down menu. The item definitions, which are stored on 

a global basis, are easily editable XML files. 

Third-party applications. Woodwing is relying on partners 

to supply some of the necessary applications for its 

target markets. For newspapers and magazines, planning 

software is being developed by one company in 

Italy and another in the U.K., and wire-service handling 

has been developed by a U.S. company, Coda 

Integration. Coda, notable for having been established 

by Baseview founders Jim Meyer and Dave Luther, is 

also working on three other modules. One polls e-mail 

folders to locate Word attachments and automatically 

converts them to InCopy format, another aids in 

uploading graphics files while a third handles stories 

that jump from one page to another. 

Status, pricing and distribution. SC Enterprise was 

released in May and is in live production at 12 sites: six 

magazines, three newspapers (one each in the U.S., 

Guatemala and The Netherlands), two ad agencies (in 

Denmark and Germany) and a book publisher in the 

U.S. Systems also have been sold and are awaiting 

installation at sites in the U.S., Denmark, Italy and 

South Africa, bringing to 16 the total number of systems 

sold (nine of which are magazines). 

Pricing is quite attractive for this level of functionality: 

$5,000 for the server, $1,000 per seat for page 

designers (not including the cost of InDesign) and $750 

per seat for reporters or editors (not including InCopy). 

The WebApps application, which provides remote 

access to the database and administrative functions, 

but not H&J, is included in the price of the system. The 

Remote Module doesn’t add to the price of Enterprise, 

but it requires the purchase of InCopy. 

One sample configuration we were told about, 

comprising 110 seats, totaled about $1,000 per seat, 

not counting installation and training, which added 

about 25% to the system price. 

Distribution is through a network of integrators, 

including Coda Integration, DPCI, Onus, Mediasystemen, 

A&F, GraphIT, SmartColor, Jeberien and IRPE, 

and resellers. Some integrators, including DPCI, will be 

building components atop Smart Connection, as well 

as performing customization. DCPI is focusing on customers 

that already own systems such as Documentum, 

since there is an existing connector. Resellers have 

been lined up in Japan, Australia and Canada, as well 

as the U.S. and most countries in Europe. 

Woodwing handles marketing and support. 

In perspective. The expansion of the Smart Connection 

line upward with the Enterprise model presents a very 

interesting situation initially for the QPS market and, 

quite possibly, a significant portion of the newspaper 

market when Enterprise’s newspaper features are fully 

developed. First, the Enterprise price will appeal immediately 

to nearly everybody looking for this kind of sys- 


tem. Second, the open architecture and customizability 

will appeal to certain types of customers at the outset, 

and probably more customers later. One of the major 

benefits of the architecture is that it is appropriate for 

Web applications, where open-source technology, PHP 

scripting and native XML communications are more 

commonly used than in the traditional newspaper market. 

As more newspapers move aggressively to enhance 

their cross-media publishing efforts, this strength of the 

Enterprise system should become increasingly valuable. 

Moving into this market at this time should be good 

for Woodwing, since QPS users are now facing the critical 

decision of whether to upgrade with Quark or switch 

to one of the emerging suppliers. How these competitors 

will fare in making the sale is still unclear. Enterprise is 

off to a good start with 16 quick sales, but that’s just a 

beginning compared with QPS and Baseview. 

Quark Offers QPS Classic 3 for OS X, 

Xpress 6 

Almost two years ago, Quark outlined a new QPS 

strategy that would address complaints that the original 

system architecture had become outdated and 

needed to be upgraded if QPS was to retain its dominant 

position in the market. The strategy involved setting 

up a three-tier hierarchy in which a system based 

on the existing proprietary architecture would serve at 

the entry level under the name QPS Classic. This system 

is the mainstay of the line today. The strategy 

called for a midlevel system to be added above the 

Classic, built around an SQL database. This system, to 

be called QPS Plus, remains in the category of “future 

products,” not yet given a detailed description or target 

release date. 

The third system in the strategy, called QPS Enterprise, 

was designed around Quark’s existing DMS 

technology to serve the high end, or “enterprise” market, 

where it is currently being sold. It uses an Oracle 9i 

database and offers a host of application modules to 

address the needs of newspapers, magazines and some 

other customers. From a technology standpoint, QPS 

Enterprise might seem like a possible migration path 

for lower-level QPS customers. However, for reasons 

of price, QPS Enterprise remains out of the range of 

most traditional QPS customers. (Quark declined to 

tell us how many QPS Enterprise systems have been 

installed to date.) 

The focus of our interest here is QPS Classic, which 

for more than 10 years has dominated the magazine 

market and also competed well against some dedicated 

newspaper systems, especially in the small and 

midrange markets. Contributing to its success have 

been its status-based workflow and moderate price, as 

well as the fact that it comes from a well-known company 

that was expected to be around for a long time in 

an industry known for consolidation, mergers and the 

sudden disappearance of companies and product lines. 

In addition, since many customers were already using 

Xpress, QPS was a logical course for those who wanted 

a multiuser system. 

Increasingly, though, QPS has suffered from 

Quark’s sluggishness in offering upgrades, both to 

remain compatible with other industry advances and 

to add features that hadn’t been available in version 

2.12. QPS Classic 3 was hoped to address both needs. 

Classic 3. Like the Classic 2.12 system, Classic 3 is built 

around the Quark Dispatch Server and a proprietary 

database. (Actually, it uses a RAM-based file system in 

which header information is stored with the file and 

loaded when the Dispatch Server is started up.) It is targeted 

at users needing up to 120 seats (the typical size 

is 55 seats, according to one integrator), although it 

has been installed in some larger configurations. 

The most important new features of Classic 3 

address compatibility issues: support for Quark’s own 

Xpress 6 and for Apple’s OS X. (Clients running OS 

9.2 can still run CopyDesk, but no other QPS applications.) 

Support for Xpress 6 and OS X gives Classic 3 

users the functionality incumbent in those developments, 

including the ability to work on different elements 

of a print or Web layout by distributing 

page-creation functions among editorial, design, Web 

and print-production personnel. Print and Web layouts 

can be stored in the same file to increase consistency 

and simplify the repurposing of print content for the 

Web. Text can be synchronized for multiple uses so 

that updating the text once can affect all instances, 

including both Web and print. 

Also included is the ability to import Excel data 

directly into Xpress layouts. Redlining and revision 

comparison features will be added to track editorial 

changes by multiple reviewers, Quark said. 

Still missing. While the enhancements in Classic 3 were 

essential for Quark to retain its QPS customers, many 



Elements palette. 

The Elements 

palette provides a 

comprehensive view 

of the workflow, 

including elements 

in the issue, their 

current basket and 

page assignment 

and some icon 

markers on the left. 

The pencil indicates 

that the InDesign 

user has checked 

out the layout, but 

the editor can still 

edit the contents. 

The flag indicates 

that an InCopy user 

has changed the 

article and has sent 

it to the Ready 

basket. The buttons 

across the top are 

for checking stories 

in and out, 

refreshing content 

from InCopy and 

alerting an InCopy 

user of an update to 

the design that 

affects the article. 

Items in the list are 

sorted based on the 

instruction at the 

bottom (here, 

grouping articles 

together). 



Database-Driven Systems 

Vendor/System Description Architecture/ 

Database 

Agile Enterprise 

TeamBase Cross-platform 

system suited for 

large publications 

and groups with 

complex editorial, 

photo desk and 

archive needs 

Atex Media Command (AMC) 

Prestige Standards-based 

system serving 

newspaper and 

magazine markets 

Harris & Baseview 

IQue Primarily serving 

low- to midrange 

newspapers; also 

magazines; leader 

in number of 

systems installed: 

2,500+, incl. 

editorial, 

advertising, etc. 

Modulo Systems 

Concerto Brand-new system 

built by former 

QPS distributor, 

aimed at 

newspapers, 

magazines and 

other applications 

Quark 

QPS Classic 3 For small and midrange 

magazines 

and newspapers, 

dominating 

magazine market 

for years. New 

Version 3 primarily 

adds support for 

OS X and Xpress 6 

QPS Enterprise Version of QPS 

based on Quark 

DMS; preferred 

upgrade path for 

QPS customers but 

pricey 

SoftCare 

K4 Publishing 

System 5.1 

Magazine Editorial and Production Systems, October 2004 

Direct QPS Classic 

competitor; first 

magazine editorial 

system for 

InDesign. Softcare 

is a former QPS 

integrator 

SQL database with 

ability to mix Mac 

and PC clients 

N-tier architecture, 

Oracle, Sybase, MS 

SQL database 

support 

Version 3: C-Tree 

database by 

FairCom; version 4: 

JBoss app server 

with MySQL 

database 

N-tier architecture, 

SQL database; SQL 

Server 

Proprietary. RAMbased 

file system 

in which header 

information is 

stored with the file 

and loaded when 

the Dispatch Server 

starts 

Main Client 

Software 

Choice of 

CopyDesk/Xpress 

with Word or 

InCopy/InDesign 


and InCopy/ 

InDesign; Word 

integration 

Own NewsEditPro 

IQue editing 

program 

integrated with 

InDesign and 

Xpress; expected 

to add CopyDesk 

and InCopy 

support 


and InCopy/ 

InDesign; H&J 

interface to Word 

promised 


only 

Oracle CopyDesk/Xpress 

only 

PrimeBase SQL InCopy/InDesign; 

Word for 

contributors; Javabased 

file manager 

can check in any 

file type 

Browser Client 

Options* 

Admin, 

Contributor, H&J 

via Web for 


only 

Admin, content 

creation and 

editing 

IQueWeb thin 

client for 

contributors 

Harmony offers 

Admin and 

Contributor 

functions; H&J 

coming via Quasar; 

Word interface 

coming 

30 total, incl. 6 

magazine sites 

(50 publications) 

65+total, incl. 5 

in magazines 

About 500 IQue 

database-driven 

systems total; 

about 75 in 


6 “pioneer” sites, 

incl. 3 magazines 

None Quark claimed 900 

Dispatch Servers as 

of Nov. 2003, 

typically 55 seats 

each; about 48% 

in magazines, 39% 

in newspapers 

WebCopyDesk 

announced in 2002 

for remote editorial 

work; also Admin 

Systems Installed 

Worldwide 

Total not disclosed, 

but Quark claimed 

to have 45-50 

DMS sites when 

QPS enterprise was 

announced in 2002 

Admin 44 sites in 9 

countries; mostly 


Pricing (estimate, 

not including 

installation) 

$25,000-$50,000 

server license plus 

$1,295 per 

production client 

(not including 

Adobe, Quark or 

Microsoft licenses) 

Server licenses 

from $9,900; client 

licenses from 

$1,500 per client 


Adobe or Quark 

software) 

Price not disclosed, 

but estimated to 

be $1,000-$2,000 

per seat average, 

including server 

software but no 

Adobe or Quark 

licenses 

$27,000-$40,000 

server license plus 

$1,250-$2,750 per 

main client (not 

including Adobe or 

Quark software) 

$25,000 server 

license plus $1,500 

per client (quoted 

by a leading 

integrator) 

Workflow 

Designers and 

editors working in 

parallel; edit once 

for print, Web and 

sister publications; 

triggers and automated 

processes 

Rules driven; 

included as 

standard 

Metadata-driven 

workflow with 

statuses and 

workflow stages 

Based on hot folders, 

baskets, statuses 

and agents to 

automate the flow 

of data and 

performance of 

tasks; scriptable 

Status-based workflow 

Not disclosed DMS Workflow 

Engine supports 

conditional workflows, 

prioritizing 

and automation of 

certain tasks 


license plus $1,500 

per main client 


Adobe software) 

Routing articles 

and layouts to 

users, groups; 

customizable for 

images, ads, multimedia 

objects; preproduction 

workflows 

*Browser client: “Admin” reflects the ability to use a browser to perform administrative functions. “Contributor” reflects the ability to use a browser to access the database remotely and submit stories, but 

not perform H&J. “H&J” reflects the ability to use a browser to access the database and perform H&J. 


Database-Driven Systems (continued) 


Database 

Unisys Global Media 

Hermes 10 High-end 

newspaper system 

being adapted to 

magazines; 

Woodwing 

supplies OEM technology 

for Adobe 

configurations 

Van Gennep 

PlanSystem3 Combination editorial 

and book 

makeup system for 

magazines and 

catalogs; North 

American sales 

partner is Quad 

Graphics 

Woodwing Software 


Enterprise 

Database-driven 

version for larger 

workgroups 

(magazines and 

newspapers) 

Folder-Based Systems 

Web Services 

architecture using 

SOAP, XML, J2EE, 

etc. Multiple SQL 

database choices 

Both Mac OS X 

and Windows 

servers; ODBC 

compliant; MySQL, 

Oracle and MS SQL 

3-tier architecture; 

any SQL database 

(default is Open- 

Source MySQL) 


Database 

Adobe Systems 

InCopy Bridge 

Workflow plug-ins 


File-based editorial 

system that 

enables concurrent 

editing within an 

InDesign page; 

designed for 

workgroups of 

approximately 2-7 

people 

NewsEditPro Original Baseview 

system for small 

newspapers, also 


Managing Editor 

TruEdit 3.1 Collaborative 

workflow system 

for InDesign and 

InCopy 

Woodwing Software 


Light 


Pro 

Adobe plug-ins for 

small magazines, 

workgroups of up 

to 7 people 

Adobe plug-ins for 

workflow at 

medium-size 


File-based system 

doesn’t require an 

explicit folder 

hierarchy; crossplatform 

support 

Folder-based 

system for Mac 

Folder-based 

system; root folder 

can be on any 

volume 

Requires InDesign, 

InCopy and Mac 

OS X or Windows 

2000 or XP 


Software 

InCopy/InDesign or 

Unisys News 

Content Manager 


and InCopy/ 

InDesign 


only 


Software 


only 

Own editing client 

integrated with 

InDesign and 

Xpress 


plug-ins 


only 

Same as SC Light InCopy/InDesign 

only 


Options* 

Contributors 200+ newspaper 

customers 

worldwide and 

5 magazines (3 in 

Europe, 1 in Latin 

America, 1 in U.S.) 

Read-only Edition 

Planning and 

Layout view 

WebApps for 

Admin and 

Contributors; 

Remote Module 

for H&J, runs with 

InCopy locally 


Options* 

150+ magazines 

and catalogs incl. 

Reader’s Digest 

(multiple sites), 

ACP, Prisma Presse 

(France); from 10 

to 530 connections 

About 10 early 

customers, including 

6 magazines 

(at least 2 

publishers have SC 

Enterprise running 

on top of 

Documentum) 


$3,000-$8,000 per 

seat typical, 

depending on 

configuration (not 

incl. license fees) 


license, $1,700 per 

main client; 

PlanMaker edition 

building module: 

$4,000 per seat 

$5,000 for server 

license plus 

$750/seat for 

editors and 

$1,000/seat for 

designers (not 

including Adobe 

software) 

None Not disclosed Included as part of 

InCopy CS, which 

retails for $249 

None About 1,000 Pro 

systems total, incl. 

about 75 in 


None Not disclosed Plug-ins cost $249 

for each InDesign 

and InCopy user 

Remote editing 

with simplified layout 

in InCopy document; 

no admin 

Supports Remote 

Module of SC 

Enterprise (see 

above) 


Worldwide 


Worldwide 







About 50 529 euros/seat 

(incl. InCopy) 

About 150 799 euros/seat 

(incl. InCopy) 

Workflow 

Workflow control 

included as 

standard 

Deadline-driven 

Advertising, Editorial 

and Production 

workflows. Track 

Job bags containing 

tangible and 

intangible assets 

Automated 

workflow 

supported 

Workflow 

Check-in/check-out 

for editorial 

contents within 

InDesign file on 

shared file server. 

Enables editing 

layouts while 

InCopy users 

write/edit 

Not disclosed Folders on shared 

file server act as 

primary workflow 

mechanism 

Folder-based 

workflow for 

InDesign and 

InCopy 

No automated 

workflow 

Automated 

workflow supports 

publication, issue, 

section and basket 

— Steve Edwards 



NxEditorial’s XML 

Editor (left) with a Web 

page. At the bottom 

is a collection of 

content that has 

been associated 

with this story and 

can be tagged and 

used in print, on the 

Web, etc. 

items are still missing, including a switch to an open, 

scalable architecture and standard database, a need 

that is even more apparent in light of the new competitors. 

Also of concern is the lack of a means of extracting 

QPS content (as XML-tagged files) for publishing 

on the Web on a real-time or scheduled basis. QPS customers 

have been able to use tools such as Callas Software’s 

Autopilot or PCI’s Internet Content Publishing 

System (iCPS) to import or export content and metadata 

automatically into or out of QPS, but they run as 

server products and come from third parties, whereas 

they should be integral parts of QPS. 

Also missing are items such as automated handling 

of jump stories, a browser interface for remote access 

and login-based preferences. 

Quark is well aware of these shortcomings and, in 

fact, addresses them in QPS Enterprise, but at a much 

higher price. Will they be added to QPS Classic later? 

That remains uncertain. If Quark goes ahead with the 

QPS Plus midlevel system, these features could be part 

of the Plus offering. So far, Quark has declined to discuss 

the details of the future product line. 

To upgrade or not? Upgrading to QPS Classic 3 has 

become controversial as customers weigh the benefits 

against the costs. On the one hand, the benefits, 

though modest, are critical for nearly anyone using the 

system for serious business. One leading integrator, 

asked about the prospects for QPS sales, said he 

expected “a breakout” this fall and winter as customers 

upgrade from 2.12 to 3. On the other hand, the 

lack of some important features that are now available 

from competitive systems has disappointed many customers 

contemplating the upgrade. This position was 

reflected by another leading integrator, who called the 

Classic 3 release too little, too late. That integrator 

expects a significant migration away from QPS. 

Weighing the benefits against the cost is difficult. 

Quark points out that it is offering the upgrade free to 

customers with whom it has maintenance contracts. 

However, based on what we have been told, we believe 

the number of customers in that category is minimal. 

The explanation for this is partly that QPS customers 

typically have not opted for maintenance contracts and 

partly that those that did were under contract with 

Modulo Systems, which held all QPS maintenance 

agreements until January 2003 and has retained the 

rights to that list since then. As a result, Quark started 

2003 with a formidable challenge in building a new list 

from scratch. One integrator, speculating on how 

many QPS maintenance contracts Quark might have, 

said he “could count [them] on one hand.” Customers 

without maintenance contracts have the option of paying 

for the upgrade or buying a maintenance contract 

first and then getting the upgrade free. Customers with 

maintenance contracts through Modulo have to pay 

for the upgrade. 

Some customers might be more inclined to make 

the upgrade if they had a better idea of when Quark 

would offer some of the features that QPS still lacks, 

but so far Quark hasn’t announced when additional 

functionality will be available or what it will entail. 

Besides the costs likely to be involved in upgrading 

QPS, customers also need to upgrade to Xpress 6 (typically 

$200–$250 per seat) and to OS X. 

The other market. For prospective customers not already 

using QPS systems, Classic 3 will be pitted against a 

growing band of competitors in the market for new 

sales. Quark declined to divulge the list price of a new 

QPS 3 system, so we asked a few integrators what they 

would charge. The best response came from one leading 

integrator, who asked to remain anonymous. He 

said that typical pricing would be about $25,000 per 

server and $1,500 per seat for software, not counting 

installation and service charges, which would bring the 

cost of a 55-seat installation to between $125,000 and 

$170,000. 

Net-linx Teams with Seinet for New System 

Although the system shown at its Nexpo debut wasn’t 

brand-new, Net-linx’s appearance at the show reflected 

a change almost as significant as a new system: a rejuvenated 

product line based on technology obtained 

through an agreement in January with Seinet of Spain. 

As a result of the agreement, Seinet’s Xtent editorial 

system technology has become the heart of Net-linx’s 

editorial offering, and Net-linx has taken over responsibility 

for the development and distribution of Xtent 

in the international newspaper market. 

The current system, which Net-linx is calling 

nxEditorial (taking its position opposite nxAdvertising), 

is essentially Xtent with some enhancements 

taken from Net-linx’s earlier Insiight system, which has 

been replaced in the product line. However, Net-linx 

said that this isn’t merely a case of reselling an existing 

product. Over time, it will serve as the starting point of 

a new J2EE-based development project. Net-linx has 

hired new programmers to work on this technology, 


and a roadmap has been created that calls for the addition 

of significant new functionality. 

No details have been disclosed about future developments, 

nor will much more be shown at Ifra, where 

nxEditorial will make its European debut showing the 

same basic functionality as at Nexpo. 

Basic features. By way of background, nxEditorial is 

built around browser clients, the use of XML to store 

data, and a broad array of editorial and production 

features for both print and Web publishing. It is characterized 

by comprehensive capabilities for production 

planning and workflow, with integrated production 

tools to manage press configuration and ink density, as 

well as workflow automation and output management 

for CTP. InDesign is used as the pagination engine, a 

change from Seinet’s original choice of Xpress. 

Since licensing the Seinet technology, Net-linx has 

made a few changes, including enhancing the data 

structure to give the system a “basket-and-desk” 

appearance and adding instant messaging. In addition, 

although the main editing program is still Seinet’s 

XML Editor, Net-linx is adding optional support for 

InCopy and will offer similar support for CopyDesk if 

customers request it, Net-linx said. 

With the new features, reporters and editors who 

want to write text to fit the layout will have three distinct 

choices. The first is to use InCopy, which will provide 

an exact H&J match. Another option is to use the 

Xtent XML Editor, which runs in a browser, and compose 

text using Seinet’s own composition engine. In 

this case, although the results won’t be identical to the 

H&J on the InDesign page, they are likely to be closer 

than using Microsoft Word as the editor, since the 

composition program was designed for use specifically 

with the XML Editor in the Xtent environment. 

The third copyfitting option, available to users 

logged into the system, is to use the XML Editor configured 

with an InDesign server to perform composition 

over the network and achieve true H&J line endings. 

Since many Nexpo visitors were seeing the Seinet 

system for the first time, Net-linx made note of features 

of particular interest. One was a “pay-per-view” 

option that enables a Web site to present different content 

to subscribers and nonsubscribers from the same 

content database, producing new options for revenue 

generation. The Web publishing module can be integrated 

into the core editorial system to enable the reuse 

of content on a 24-hour basis. 

Workflow tools. Another popular item, Net-linx said, 

was the workflow automation software, which was of 

particular interest to newspapers that have already 

achieved the cost benefits of pagination and are banking 

on process automation as one of the few remaining 

areas where additional savings can be achieved. This 

tool was developed by Seinet as a separate module 

from the Xtent system and is being sold by Net-linx for 

use with other editorial or production systems. 

Net-linx reported that ABC in Spain, a large Unisys 

Hermes customer, uses it with Seinet’s output management 

module to automate its production of about 

3,000 pages a week in 13 editions across six printing 

sites. Net-linx plans to offer this same capability as a 

product to all Hermes customers. 

The workflow automation software also has been 

interfaced to the Print4 inking system, Harlequin RIPs 

and several brands of CTP devices. 

Pricing. NxEditorial pricing depends on the configuration 

but typically runs between $3,500 and $5,000 per 

simultaneous user license, not counting the cost of 

third-party software. The browser-based nature of the 

XML Editor enables Net-linx to offer concurrent-user 

licensing, which helps to lower capital expenditure 

requirements and increase flexibility. 

Looking forward … and back. When Net-linx signed the 

deal, Seinet had six customers using the version of 

Xtext that was current at the time. One of those, located 

in Spain, is implementing the version shown at 

Nexpo, which includes the Net-linx enhancements. 

(About 20 other Seinet customers date back to the days 

of Seinet’s predecessor company, ESE. Many of them 

should be good candidates for upgrades to nxEditorial 

systems.) 

The arrival of nxEditorial in the Net-linx product 

line has important implications for the already-beleaguered 

customers with earlier generation systems from 

Net-linx, SII, CText and Computext. “We basically 

consider nxEditorial as being Insiight V3,” said Albert 

deBruijn, Net-linx’s VP of marketing. “We are currently 

finalizing the first Insiight-to-nxEditorial upgrade.” 

Although nxEditorial is the only editorial system in the 

product line, Net-linx still sells Coyote terminals and 

Coyote Layout to SII customers. 


Workflow design 

with nxEditorial. In 

the main window, 

designers plot 

a workflow 

graphically either by 

dragging previously 

designed steps from 

the library (left) or 

by creating new 

steps. The behavior 

of each step is 

defined in the 

properties window 

(middle). 



3 views of an article in 

Headline. First: 

Opening an article 

in Headline brings it 

up in this format, 

with its components 

(headlines, intro, 

body text) separated 

as shown here. 

Second: The 

operator can get a 

preview of how the 

article will appear 

on the Web page 

based on location 

information 

assigned to the 

article, which here 

includes the 

headline, intro and 

photo, but not the 

body text. (This is a 

preview, not the 

actual page, since 

the story hasn’t 

been published yet.) 

Third: Clicking on 

the article on the 

Web page brings up 

the full story in its 

Web format. Note 

the automatic 

insertion of the date 

and time, section 

heading (“News: 

International”) and 

the author’s name. 

“CText had already stopped its Dateline system 

long before Net-linx purchased them, but we continue 

to support it,” deBruijn said. “We do have a product 

called nxTextBridge, which lets SII customers introduce 

InDesign into the workflow in much the same 

way as CCI, Cybergraphic and Unisys have let their 

customers use InDesign with the core product. This is 

a nice stepping stone to nxEditorial.” 

From a marketing standpoint, Net-linx has exclusive 

worldwide rights to the Xtent technology for the 

newspaper and directory industries. From that perspective, 

Net-linx will use Ifra for the formal launch of 

nxEditorial in Europe (and did the same for the Asia 

and Pacific region at Panpa in Australia). Seinet won’t 

exhibit at Ifra since it doesn’t sell directly to newspapers 

anymore (except for its existing customers in 

Spain). 

Corporate changes. On the corporate front, Net-linx has 

consolidated its operation into a single division encompassing 

the newspaper and directory operations. The 

plan calls for unifying the salesforces in the future, after 

cross-training can be conducted. 

SCS Rolls Out Scoop Headline in U.S. 

Software Consulting Services, which has the American 

marketing rights to the products from Wilkenson 

Scoop of Sweden, gave a U.S. debut to the Headline 

system that was part of the merger earlier this year 

between Scoop and Bombus of Sweden, the developer 

of Headline. SCS made two announcements regarding 

the merger. The new company has been named Scoop 

Publishware AB, retiring both the Wilkenson and 

Bombus names, although Ulf Wilkenson remains in 

charge after the merger. Also, Headline has replaced 

Scoop Web Publisher in the product line on the 

grounds that it has better functionality for Web publishing. 

The Scoop Editorial System (the current version 

of the system originally developed by Wilkenson 

Scoop) will continue to focus on print publishing. 

We were impressed in our first look at Headline. It 

offers good functionality and an appealing user interface, 

employing a lot of drag-and-drop operations. 

Headline was designed for use in both print and 

Web publishing and is, in fact, being used for both 

applications by current customers. However, as part of 

the Scoop line, its focus will be on Web publishing, 

used in tandem with the Scoop Editorial System for 

print publishing. (Scoop Publishware AB is marketing 

Headline to customers who are presumed to be running 

the Scoop Editorial System for their print editions. 

At Nexpo, Scoop showed its progress in integrating the 

Web and print systems.) 

Headline runs under Windows with an SQL database 

and supports the Scoop WinEdit and MacEdit terminals 

that are used with the Scoop Editorial System. 

In operation. The main screen, called the Headline Desk 

Manager, serves as a control point for all publications, 

supporting print, Web, PDA and WAP (wireless access 

protocol) output formats. Since Headline’s main function 

with Scoop is Web publishing, we’ll restrict our 

comments to that medium, presuming that stories will 

begin in the Scoop Editorial System database and will 

be sent from there to the Headline Desk Manager for 

publication on the Web edition. Stories sent from the 

Scoop database retain their features in Headline, 

including their typographic markup, as well as whatever 

associations might exist to link photos, captions, 

sidebars (or “Fact Lists” in Headline terms), etc., in 

story “packages.” 

For editing a story, Headline offers a nice facility 

that displays each story with areas delineating its components: 

the first headline, second headline, introduction 

and body text. The same procedure applies to 

editing existing stories as well as writing new ones. 

When a story is ready for publication, it is sent to 

the appropriate Web page (front page, sports, business, 

etc.) by selecting the destination from a pulldown 

menu or by dragging the story to the target page’s fold- 


er on the left side of the screen. Page designs are controlled 

by templates that define the layout and can 

specify, for example, how many stories can appear in 

each zone within the template: top stories, news list, 

etc. Each story is given a priority, which helps determine 

its order on the page. If two stories have the same 

priority, the later one chronologically gets the top position. 

When the number of stories in a zone exceeds the 

number that is permitted, the system follows a userdefined 

instruction on where to send the surplus stories: 

to the news list, to another page, etc. 

Once a story is sent for publication, it can be previewed 

in place on its destination page by clicking the 

mouse. From that preview, which might show just the 

headline and the intro components, clicking on the 

story displays the full story with any associated photos, 

sidebars, etc. Photos can be added to a story by dragging 

them from their directory location directly to the 

story. Within the Headline program, it is possible to 

make some basic adjustments to photos, such as cropping 

and adding special effects. Another nice feature is 

automatic adjustment of a photo’s resolution to suit 

the specific requirements of its use. 

Along with sending a story to the Web, the operator 

can prescribe the time it will be published and when 

it will be removed from the site. 

Status and pricing. Headline is running in more than 80 

sites in Sweden, all installed before the merger. Scoop 

hopes to have finished integrating the Scoop and 

Headline systems by Ifra (in mid-October), when pricing 

will be announced. 

Headline comes with a set of basic templates: front 

page, sub page, three teaser pages and an article template. 

Other standard capabilities include a button for 

searching content on the Web page, software for previewing 

pages for printing and a function for “sending 

a story to a friend.” Additional Web modules are 

optionally available, priced separately, to enable creating 

Web forms, running reader forums and discus- 

sions, sending electronic greeting cards, and supporting 

multiple-channel output (WAP, SMS, etc.). 

Other Editorial News 

InDesign update: AMC adds Word interface. Adobe has 

achieved its goal of establishing InCopy and InDesign 

as industry standards for editing and pagination, taking 

their place alongside Xpress, which continues to 

reap the benefits of having gotten there first. With most 

system suppliers offering both options, the primary 

remaining question is when the Adobe one will be 

available for customer use. The newest ones to arrive, 

from AMC and Saxotech, debuted at Nexpo; APT and 

Tera are among those still working on implementing 

InCopy and InDesign; only a few (Baseview for one) 

haven’t formally announced full support for InCopy, 

but surely it is coming. 

However, despite the benefits of using InCopy — 

especially the advantages of a tightly integrated program 

for writing to fit — any thoughts of eliminating 

Microsoft Word from newspaper workflows are premature. 

In fact, Word remains very much alive in the 

newsroom (where it has provided input to Xpress for 

years). In our previously mentioned report from America 

East, we covered an interface linking Word to InDesign 

from ATS. At Nexpo, AMC (Atex Media 

Command) added its capability as an option with its 

new Prestige 5 software. 

AMC’s Word-InDesign interface uses a similar 

approach to the Word-Xpress interfaces employed for 

years. Stories written in Word are H&J’d against InDesign 

page templates to determine the depth, using 

InDesign as the H&J engine. The Word user sees the 

results of H&J to determine the fit. If additional editing 

is done in Word, the Word H&J program is used, 

which will differ at least to some degree from the 

results obtainable in InDesign, since the two algorithms 

are quite different. To get a new H&J against 

the layout, the operator sends the story off again. 

AMC’s interface does more than just report accurate 

copyfitting information. It also 

supports the “Notes” mode that was a 

trademark of old Atex systems. Text 

placed in a “note” in Word is maintained 

as an InDesign note on the page. 

As an alternative to writing a story to 

fit the layout after a story has been 

assigned to a page, the Word operator 

can write a story to fit an InDesign 

shape before the story has been 

assigned to a page. Similarly, photos 

and captions can be associated with a 

story being written in Word, after 

which they automatically flow onto the 

page in InDesign when the story is 

placed on the page. 

AMC, which now offers Word, 

InCopy and CopyDesk for editing and 




InDesign and Xpress for pagination, used Nexpo to 

monitor customers’ thoughts regarding how they would 

deploy a system with all of those options. The consensus 

seemed to be that most people would still create stories 

in Word, but almost all said that they would use InCopy 

for editing after the story is submitted. 

“I think that if CopyDesk had been available to 

Atex (AMC) when we first put Prestige together, we 

would probably have seen a similar pattern with 

Quark installations also,” said AMC product manager 

Stewart Bowley. 

New corporate face at AMC. Besides the Word-InDesign 

interface, the biggest news at AMC (Atex) was in toplevel 

personnel, where John Hawkins replaced Robert 

Banner as CEO. Banner, who had served as CEO since 

the merger of Atex and Media Command two years 

ago, is credited with completing the initial phase of 

restructuring and will continue as a director and the 

company’s second-largest shareholder. 

For long-time readers of this publication, of perhaps 

greater interest might be the departure of Bernie 

Grinberg, founder of the Cybergraphic business that 

has been a critical component of the company since the 

merger. Also gone is Phil Lowe, who had played a similar 

role with the Matrix operation that supplied the 

circulation software now in the AMC product line. 

There was no explanation for the departures of 

Lowe and Grinberg, who had headed their respective 

business units at the time of the merger and continued 

in those roles following the merger. Lowe had recently 

been promoted to a position as second in command 

behind Banner before Hawkins was named to replace 

Banner. The abrupt change suggests that Hawkins, 

who had joined AMC a year ago, wanted to work with 

his own team. Before joining AMC, Hawkins had more 

than 30 years experience in the telecommunications 

and IT industries, including 19 with Philips Electronics. 

AMC said it will use his experience in acquisitions “to 

build and consolidate” AMC’s opportunities in the 

media market. The company didn’t elaborate. 

Hawkins’ team includes Alan Reardon, newly 

appointed corporate development director, and four 

regional CEOs: Joann Froelich for the Americas, 

Alfred Chong for Asia, Ross Wood for Australia and 

New Zealand, and David Hall for Europe, the Middle 

East and Africa. 

Besides noting the changes in personnel, which 

have been labeled a “final consolidation” following the 

merger, AMC also insisted that there won’t be any consolidation 

of products and that both the Media Command 

and Atex editorial and advertising systems will 

remain in the product line. 

AMC is controlled by the Kistefos Norwegian 

investment group. 

APT rebuilds editorial system. Advanced Publishing 

Technology (APT) is rebuilding its editorial software 

using new development tools to make it more flexible 

and to speed the future development process. It will 

feature a three-tier architecture, a thinner client and a 

100% scriptable server. Among the benefits will be 

true cross-platform functionality, with support for 

Windows, Macintosh and Linux, and a more flexible 

queue structure supporting a five-level, user-definable 

hierarchy. APT believes that the added flexibility, 

including scriptable business logic, will better address 

the needs of larger newspapers. The new structure will 

speed future developments fivefold, APT said. The 

project, which involves rewriting the software from the 

ground up, is expected to be completed by year-end. 

APT also reported that its integration of InCopy 

and InDesign into the editorial system is ready for beta 

testing. The plug-ins were developed by APT, not a 

third party. 

Meanwhile, Media General has ordered APT editorial 

systems for installation at its 20 community 

papers (not its Tampa, Fla., Richmond, Va., or Winston-Salem, 

N.C., sites). Five of the systems have been 

installed already. Four of the Media General papers are 

previous APT customers that will upgrade to the latest 

system (which is now called Falcon to match the naming 

scheme for other members of the product line). 

APT said its editorial systems have now been installed 

in approximately 120 sites, including about a dozen 

this year. 

Pongrass revamps architecture, signs U.S. agent. Pongrass 

Publishing Systems has restructured its editorial system 

to make it easier to deal with the need to support both 

InDesign and Xpress on multiple hardware platforms, 

which has become increasingly problematic. It involves 

incorporating an “insulation layer” to separate the program 

code from the specific requirements of the program. 

This layer, which Pongrass calls a cross-platform 

toolkit (XPT), “presents a common set of features to 

the client programs in the system configuration. A 

client program needs to be written once only, and XPT 

generates the multiple versions required.” 

The plan required rewriting its programs from 

scratch, which Pongrass is doing, starting with its Editorial 

and Ad-Tracking systems. One of the goals is to 

avoid the complications that result when Adobe and 

Quark issue new releases of their products. “Both 

Quark and Adobe change their APIs between releases, 

which means supporting separate versions for Quark 

4.1 and 6, as well as InDesign 2 and CS,” Managing 

Director Les Pongrass noted. He’ll have a chance to 

employ the XPT approach with InDesign CS 2, which, 

we have heard from many developers, will require a 

significant amount of rewriting of code to achieve 

compatibility. 

Meanwhile, Pongrass reported receiving six orders 

for its new Editorial system, including four to be configured 

with InDesign and two with Xpress. They’re all 

replacing existing Pongrass editorial systems. 


Also on the sales front, Pongrass announced an 

OEM agreement with Icanon Associates of Hatfield, 

Pa., allowing Icanon to integrate Pongrass’s editorial 

and advertising products with its own Newzware Business 

Software suite for newspapers. Icanon will market 

the Pongrass products under the Newzware brand. 

Icanon’s first sale was of an advertising system to the 

Sun Chronicle in Attleboro, Mass. 

Baseview revamps architecture around SQL. Harris and 

Baseview unveiled a new Editorial Server for the Baseview 

IQue system that will enable it to address the 

needs of larger newspapers. It is built on an SQL database 

(initially open-source MySQL, but later supporting 

Oracle and MS SQL) running under Windows or 

Mac OS X. 

Baseview has been using Faircom’s C-Tree database 

technology with IQue version 3. The new Version 

4 employs a three-tier architecture comprising a database 

server, a JBoss application server and clients. The 

business logic has been abstracted into the application 

server. Administrative components for the database 

and application server are written in Java to run under 

Windows and Mac OS X, as well as various other versions 

of Unix. The company said it has been “making 

great use of the open-source software community in 

the last two years.” 

The new IQue system supports multiple publications 

and multiple platforms within the same newsroom. 

Both Xpress and InDesign can be used for 

pagination, integrated with Baseview’s own NewsEdit- 

Pro IQue editing program (we understand that Copy- 

Desk and InCopy will be supported at a future time). 

Administrators can log in to configure the server from 

remote Windows or Macintosh computers. The search 

engine the system employs supports proximity searches 

and wildcards. 

A hot-backup option uses two IQue Editorial 

Servers to write data concurrently to both servers. If 

the main server fails, the backup server automatically 

takes control. 

Magazine customer for Hermes. Unisys has upgraded the 

system at the Santa Rosa (Calif.) Press Democrat to 

Hermes 10, Release Edition 1, where it will produce a 

slick, perfect-bound wine magazine, making it the first 

U.S. magazine customer for Unisys. One interesting 

sidelight is that the magazine is produced using InDesign 

composition, while the daily newspaper uses Hermes 

composition. 

Unisys keeps adding to the Hermes feature set. A 

new item at Nexpo was an extension to News Gathering 

Manager that enables wire-service content and email 

text and attachments to be searched for specific 

content, which can then be placed automatically in 

InCopy files or on InDesign pages. In addition, text elements 

entering the system can be formatted on the fly 

using the Hermes Text Processor. Functions that can be 

performed include the transformation of data, such as to 

expand abbreviations or swap the order of items, which 

can be useful in producing sports data, where local 

teams or players can be brought to greater prominence. 

Tansa upgrades proofing tool, opens U.S. office. Tansa, the 

Norwegian developer of an innovative proofing and 

hyphenation system, announced the release of a major 

upgrade to its product and the opening of an office in 

the U.S., reflecting the company’s view that the U.S. 

market is ready for its technology. As before, it proofreads 

phrases rather than single words, so it can check 

not only the spelling, but also the usage of words and 

the style of writing. In so doing, it checks documents 

against multiple dictionaries and sets of style rules customized 

specifically for a customer’s organization. 

The new version, called Tansa System 3, has been 

completely rewritten to provide better performance, 

the ability to scale to larger configurations and additional 

user benefits. 

To better communicate between clients and 

servers, including over greater distances, System 3 is 

based on XML and Web Services. A new SDK (software 

developers toolkit) provides a new way of dealing 

with clients, making it possible to work with nearly 

any system. Among the new developments is support 

for InDesign and InCopy for its proofing system (in 

addition to Word, CopyDesk and Xpress). The new 

version also opens the way for new future options, 

such as the ability to support plug-ins for additional 

services. 

Among the user benefits are a new client interface 

with adjustable windows, page dividers and new shortcut 

keys. For the administrator, an improved tool 

enhances language support and offers an easier means 

of adding corrections and new words to custom dictionaries. 

Tansa said it has about 200 customers totaling 


Tansa System 3 

for Word. In 

proofreading this 

Word document, 

Tansa found 17 

errors, some of 

which were ordinary 

spelling mistakes 

and others used the 

multiple-word 

function to identify 

problems. In the 

highlighted entry, 

although 

“Madelein” is one 

possible spelling of 

this name, when 

used with “K. 

Albright” the 

spelling needs to be 

“Madeleine.” 



about 6,000 seats worldwide, configured with systems 

from CCI, Scoop, Enator and others. In the U.S., where 

Tansa has reseller agreements with AMC (Atex), Saxotech 

and Unisys, it has six customers (all using Saxotech 

systems). Its new U.S. office is in Lakewood 

Ranch, Fla. The director of operations is Robert Laszlo, 

formerly with Saxotech. 

Conclusion: Editorial System Market 

in Transition 

For most of the history of electronic magazine production, 

shopping for an editorial system hasn’t involved 

very many choices. The market has been dominated by 

two dynasties. First there was Atex, which parlayed its 

early work with U.S. News & World Report into a 

booming business serving more than 700 customers 

producing an impressive array of magazine titles, as 

well as newspapers. But when Atex failed to adapt to 

desktop technology in the 1980s, its empire started to 

crumble as customers wanting new technology slowly 

drifted elsewhere. (Atex reports that 10 of the old J-11 

systems are still in use.) 

As Atex’s market slipped away, there were many 

alternatives for newspaper customers, but there 

weren’t many suppliers targeting magazines, which 

opened the way for Quark to extend its line from the 

single-user Xpress product to the multiterminal Quark 

Publishing System. Quark, which offered the attraction 

of a status-based workflow feeding the familiar Xpress 

pagination engine, built up its own dynasty that rivaled 

For most of the history of electronic magazine 

production, shopping for an editorial system 

hasn’t involved very many choices. 

Atex’s in number of systems in use. 

Twelve years after the launch of the Quark system 

(renamed QPS Classic), the industry appears ready for 

another transition. Not unlike Atex, Quark has jeopardized 

its position by relying far too long on old technology. 

In fact, the “new” QPS Classic 3 still looks a 

lot like earlier QPS systems with its proprietary database, 

its lack of a browser interface for reporters and 

other personnel, and its inability to communicate data 

easily with the outside world. 

Quark has an answer to most of the shortcomings 

of QPS Classic in its “upgrade” system, QPS Enterprise, 

which is based on newer technology but has a 

price tag to match its Enterprise label. So far, very few 

customers have chosen to upgrade QPS Classic systems 

to the Enterprise level. (Quark declines to disclose the 

number of Enterprise customers it has.) 

Why can’t Quark update its architecture with a 

“new-generation” QPS Classic to compete with the 

new breed of systems of today? Maybe it can. And 

maybe it is already doing so. At least, Quark reportedly 

has another alternative on the drawing board, the 

QPS Plus midlevel system mentioned two years ago as 

part of the company’s overall strategy. However, until 

Quark discloses a launch schedule and the system’s 

specifications, the industry will remain skeptical. As 

one integrator told us, “Quark has been spinning this 

for two years now… They could build it, but who 

would buy it?… And it would severely undercut their 

new flagship product, QPS Enterprise, so why would 

they bother?” 

Meanwhile, time is being lost now that Modulo, 

Woodwing and others have attractive products to offer 

to QPS owners desperate for an upgrade, as well as to 

other customers. 

InDesign: the other issue. Although QPS Classic’s outdated 

architecture has presented companies such as 

Modulo, Softcare, Van Gennep, Baseview and Woodwing 

with great opportunities, there is another issue 

facing Quark: the fact that nearly every multiuser system 

marketed for magazine or newspaper use offers 

InCopy and InDesign either as the only choice or as an 

alternative to CopyDesk and Xpress. Since it’s difficult 

to imagine Quark supporting InDesign, Quark faces 

the unenviable task of trying to convince its customers 

that all they need are CopyDesk and Xpress. 

Who will have the next dynasty? With new systems 

on the market and being put into production use, and 

with additional suppliers eagerly eyeing the QPS 

upgrade market, will any of these modern systems gain 

the upper hand and build the next dynasty? Or will a 

few suppliers divide the market in much the way that 

the newspaper market has been split among myriad 

suppliers? 

It’s too soon to make a prediction, but Modulo and 

Woodwing have brought new options to the market, 

with important strengths. 

Modulo has some key advantages, including its 

long experience with the QPS base, which provides a 

good entrée for reaching new prospects, and its ability 

to offer QPS customers the choice of Xpress or InDesign, 

which allows them to start with a Quark system 

and ease into InDesign later. Modulo also has its deal 

with Quasar for interactive remote composition, 

among other capabilities, which hasn’t been demonstrated 

publicly yet but might turn out to be significant. 

Woodwing, which has already recouped much of 

its development costs through sales of Smart Connection 

Light and Pro systems, has a huge price advantage 

and an architecture that supports an ease of customization 

that will appeal to certain customers. Woodwing 

also has a unique system for remote composition using 

actual InDesign files. Also to its advantage is its long 

experience working with Adobe software. 

The accompanying table shows the key features of 

these new systems as well as other competitors in the 

magazine market. 


For customers not needing a database-driven system 

— that is, workgroups of a few users such as those that 

produce most small magazines — there are some good 

alternatives on the market now that weren’t there a few 

years ago, when QPS was growing rapidly. These systems 

— including Adobe’s Creative Suite Bridge products, 

Managing Editor’s TruEdit and Woodwing’s Light 

and Pro — aren’t within the scope of this article, but 

they could be a factor in sales of systems to small users. 

In addition, a few suppliers of newspaper systems 

have taken aim at this market. They remain logical 

competitors since it is probably easier for a newspaper 

system to adapt to magazine production than vice 

versa. One example is AMC (Atex Media Command), 

which is now installing its Prestige editorial system for 

magazine production. Among the AMC customers are 

IPC (Europe’s largest magazine publisher), Reed Business 

Publications, BBC Publications and Metropress, 

in London, and VVA Kommunikation GmbH of Germany, 

which will use it for cross-media publishing. 

Baseview has had success at smaller magazines, 

and Unisys has begun marketing its Hermes system to 

large magazines. 

Other newspapers move to keep pace. We’ve focused our 

concluding comments so far on the QPS market, but 

that doesn’t mean it is the only area of activity among 

editorial systems. In fact, earlier in this article, we covered 

some important developments in the newspaper 

market, with a common theme of veteran companies 

striving to keep pace with changing technology and 

markets. 

The most striking of those was the decision by Netlinx 

to remake its editorial line after struggling — with 

little success — to build a product line around its 

CText and SII origins. The new editorial approach is 

based on technology acquired from Seinet of Spain, 

which already provides good support for XML and 

Web publishing, as well as most of the other ingredients 

needed in today’s market. Net-linx plans to take 

the Seinet technology well beyond its current level. 

Also seeking existing technology to bolster its 

product line was Wilkenson Scoop, which abandoned 

its own Web publishing program in favor of the Bombus 

Headline system, which it is integrating with the 

Scoop print capabilities to produce a sounder allaround 

product. 

Other companies whose news centered on enhancing 

technical areas to enable advantages in the future 

include Baseview, which has switched to a three-tiered 

architecture with an SQL database for its IQue version 

4 system; APT, which is rebuilding its Falcon editorial 

system in line with modern architecture to streamline 

future development efforts; Pongrass, which has 

rewritten part of its code to make it easier to accommodate 

future versions of third-party software; and 

Unisys, which is in the late stages of its architectural 

change and is building at the application level. 

The bottom line. Where will Quark figure in the future? 

Because Quark has been so tight-lipped about its strategy 

the past couple of years, it’s impossible to know 

what may be jujust around the corner. The company 

certainly has plenty of resources to put behind new 

developments (for more on Quark’s plans, see The 

Seybold Report, Vol. 4, No. 3). 

However, one thing appears certain: The era of 

Quark’s domination is over, both in the QPS editorial 

system market and the Xpress pagination market. 

From here on, Quark will have to fight for whatever 

market share it can get. Adobe has assured that in pagination, 

and companies such as Modulo and Woodwing 

(as well as Softcare and Van Gennep) are doing 

the same with editorial systems. TSR 


Adobe Systems 

ph: (408) 536-6000 

www.adobe.com 

Agile Enterprise 

ph: (603) 880-6440 

www.agileenterprise.com 

Atex Media Command 

(AMC) 

ph: (813) 739-1700 

www.atex.com 


ph: (734) 662-5800 

www.harrisbaseview.com 

Managing Editor Inc. (MEI) 

ph: (215) 886-5662 

www.maned.com 

Modulo Systems 

ph; (617) 234-4414 

www.modulosystems.com 

Quark 

ph: (303) 894-8888 

www.quark.com 

SoftCare 

ph: (49-0) 4055-69500 

www.k4publishingsystem. 

com 

Unisys Global Media 

ph: (800) 874-8647 x678 

www.unisys.com 

Van Gennep 

ph: (31-20) 679-6029 

www.vangennep.com 

WoodWing Sofware 

ph: (31-75) 6143-400 

www.woodwing.com

New Contenders in the Editorial Systems Market - Impressed

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?