Just use Serif Publisher
If you really need DTP layouting functions, use a DTP product as word processors simply aren't flexible or precise enough in layout. I've been using Serif in various forms to do this, on and off, for over 20 years.
Microsoft is suggesting alternatives to its doomed Publisher product ahead of the software's demise in 2026. The Redmond-based biz warned last year that its venerable desktop publishing software would reach the end of the road in October 2026 when Office LTSC 2021 support ends. At that point, the application will be stripped …
I'd switch to the whole Affinity suite, Affinity Publisher is quite impressive IMHO although it's probably the application I use least of all three so I may have missed something.
Still, worth it, doubly so if you wait for their regular half price offers (roughtly every half year :) ).
That makes me feel old, think the last time I used Serif was approaching 25 years ago. Glad to see it is still going as it was great software then and I still regularly groan at the limitations of Powerpoint whenever I want to layout larger blocks of text in it.
Thumbs up for the Serif mention, I think I started with version 3, I dread to think how many years ago that was, mid 90s?
But I switched to MS Pub as I found it easier to use, looks like I'll be heading back to Serif :)
Mines the one with a copy of Pageplus in the pocket.
I am not aware of any good publishing tools for general SOHO-level use.
MS Publisher is/was as awful as any other.
Nowadays we don't want page-based formats, we want e-documents that adapt to the phone/desktop/assistive presentation format. Web browsers such as Chrome and Firefox have pretty dam' good PDF export if we really want a non-volatile page-based e-copy, to print off as and when.
And we want to embed text, spreadsheets, presentations, even animations, inside each other without having to care a damn about formats and compatibility.
There are plenty of XML based "standards" and formats around for this sort of thing.
But competent toolsets? Fuck off, lusers! Grr!
Oh, somebody, please prove me wrong!
I'm not sure of the details of their file format, but for DTP you could always use Postscript. But if you can't run in even in a VM, then the point is moot. The last time I used it, was as PagePlus in a Windows VM because the printer only hat GDI drivers. It was worth this for the job at the time.
> Which OS do you use? That could be anything from Linux to BSD to Solaris to BeOS to 1001 others...
The mainstream OS for the Internet. Not every box is a command-line administered server.
Kinda curious that when I mention OS and spreadsheet I get more thumbs up than down, but when I add in an open file format I get massively downvoted. Reg commentards, don'ch'a luv 'em?!
>The mainstream OS for the Internet
You are not cheeky, clever, or interesting by communicating in this way. In fact, you appear to be one such disdainful "reg commentard".
Ironic, eh?
But sure, I'll pretend that you want to use desktop publishing capatabilties on an android powered device like that makes more sense somehow. Get bent.
Maybe try it first before you comment on features you'd like? You can try it for free, it runs on Windows, MacOS and iPadOS and the license doesn't distinguish between the platforms either.
In addition, they are receptive to sane feature requests and they have a forum that's actually visited by staff, so try it.
You can always resume whinging later :).
> Let me know when they add spreadsheet functions
I don't pretend to be much of a desktop publishing person (what little I do do, I like to do with chains of command line tools anyway) - but I can't help but be curious what spreadsheet functions you think ought to be *inside* a DP program?
Affinity (claims[1]) to be able to pull data from Excel files as well as other sources, just like many other page manglers do[2].
On the (old-fashioned) basis that the best tools (try to) do one job well, so edit spreadsheets in a spreadsheet program then export results to another program that actually does a good job at layout formatting, wanting spreadsheet functions inside the DP seems like just trying to make yet another monstrous bloated lump which isn't much of a spreadsheet and is now a painful DP app.
What am I missing here?
[1] and therefore may be really bad at it, but that is a different sort of complaint
[2] if only for that old standby, a mail merge - that inevitably fails half way and leaves you passing around flyers for [event] [date] [location-but-not-that-awful-pub-the-kings-head]
Everything. So that when some clown drops a spreadsheet into the doc, the fecking thing doesn't break.
In my line of work, everybody expects things to work online. Page-based formats are just a 30-year-old anomaly we have all learned to put up with. People drop in URLs and they have to work. Clowns link images and have to be nailed to the floor for not inserting them. Clowns also drop in spreadsheets and expect users to be able to enter the seed data themselves. Sure, would be great if that actually worked, this is online shit, right? Policing this kind of shit-shit is a massive timewaster. If it did just work, that would be, um... productive. Sensible, even. No clown makeup required.
Curiously enough, back in the day some of the most productive and intuitive document processors around were spreadsheet-based, and dropped the text right in there. I used Fireworkz on RISC OS to good effect. Still have the floppies - and the RISC PC.
>> What am I missing?
> Everything
> Description of a truly shit and out of control workflow - and workplace
Sorry for your situation, but no amount of bloat in the applications is going to fix that. Without a modicum of discipline, they will break anything.
"When did a youngster ever listen to its elders?"
Conventionally never. (As it ought to be.)
Unfortunately viewing† footage of MAGA love-ins there appears a preponderance of the younger, if not actual youth, ranting for their demented senile elders.
If the demise of MS Publisher were to cause a few its users to invest in a text editor and a few SitePoint titles on web design, html and CSS the web might be a slightly less hideous sight.
† thankfully from afar.
The moral of this is, as usual, never doing anything on a computer with a Corporate Software, that may need to be done again in 10-20 years time. Neither shiould you expect to retrieve it and edit it from any time after saving it. That is, if you CAN retrieve it from a HDD/SSD/Cloud environment. Especially the Cloud. It can go away, or be corrupted in a nano-second.
You're right. I still keep a goose around for the feathers, but the ink is sometimes hard to get. And as backup I have some stone tablets and chisels.
I think the use of documented formats is not an unreasonable demand to make, that makes lock-in that bit more difficult. And by 'documented' I don' mean the steaming pile that MS produced so it could pretend to be open.
You can still read the Magna Carta. I'm not sure if it is still true but Acts of Parliament used to be written with similar ink on vellum, specifically because of the problem you parody. Laser discs fell by the wayside not long after the BBC Micro project terminated, so until some geek or other worked out how to access those their longevity was about 1600 years less than the OP.
Pure text is the one universal data format.
There are many ignorant people out there driving their computers with their eyes closed; are we surprised when they get into trouble?
When I need to create a result file in reflowable format (for PCs, tablets, smartphones, etc ), I use extremely-simple HTML.
If you all are going to be like THAT ... let's remember Control Data's "display code", which used six bits to represent 63 different characters, including some APL-like characters such as "unequal", "and", "or", "implies", etc.; let's also remember CDC's 8-in-12 ASCII (each character used 8 bits for the ASCII part, with four leading 0 bits), and their 6/12 version of ASCII, where roughly 60 characters were encoded in 6 bits, and lower-case, and other special ASCII characters (~`{}| etc ) were escaped with a leading "@" or a leading "^".
Now, where did my IBM 026 keypunch drum program card get off to ...?
Sort of lives on in Zombie fashion as Adobe InDesign. Unfortunately they fudged / kludged ebook "creation" into InDesign and the result is often worse than Vellum. Should only be used to create layout for paper publishing. Libre Office is now better than Word 2003 / Word 2007 and MS Publisher was always junk compared to others. Calibre or Sigil for ebooks from LO Office Writer source. Edit odt, and an extra Save As in docx for Calibre. The LO Writer also produces PDF good enough for publishing, if the layout is achievable. Also HTML, though websites are more often via CMS now.
I preferred Xerox Ventura myself, particularly for longer documents such as writing user manuals; unfortunately Corel took it over and it never recovered.
These days I'm often using Visio for documents that need careful laying out, particularly as senior management seem to like flow charts!
Viso was actually a very good program before Microsoft got its hands on it. Now I have to use Omnigraffle on the Mac if I have to draw something quick as it doesn't get in the way (a reason why I also prefer Apple's Keynote over Powerpoint - way quicker to draw up something usable).
I do have to admre Microsoft's consistency, though, they've been making a mess of UIs for some 40 years now. God knows how many manhours their incompetence has cost collectively over the years.
Well, TeX does have all the extensions and helper packages that anyone could ever need. What other DP solution can give you anything like TikZducks?
(Icon: there is also TikZpingus if you that way inclined, but I mean, come on, ducks!)
This post has been deleted by its author
I have an artist friend who was employed by a plant nursery for 20ish years, 'till corporate got a brain fart and re-organised the company, cutting his job.
He used Microsoft Publisher, because that's what they had, that's what they wanted him to use, and he's no IT guy to suggest anything different.
All day, every day, he lived in Publisher, making brochures, flyers, and signs. The nursery now has gigabytes of Publisher files. He gave less-than-one-day turnaround to managers who would come to him for signs and such the day before a (held-every-year) sale.
Corporate thinks they'll get one-day turnaround using a service bureau, and that it will be cheaper than was paying him as an employee.
Word is a word processor.
Powerpoint is a presentation designer.
Publisher was a desktop publisher.
They are three entirely different pieces of software with three completely different purposes. Along with typesetting software, they are unique products.
I get abandoning Publisher (it was a backwards compatibility nightmare, not great and expensive), especially if it's not your core product, but it's ludicrous to assert the others are suitable substitutes. It's as bad as suggesting "just use Paint" when retiring a vector-based image editor, or similar.
Serif/Affinity or similar is the next closest thing that's not prohibitively expensive, or Scribus if you want open-source.
But Word as an alternative? Only if you're just printing up a poster for a village fete and have nothing else to hand.
+1 for FrameMaker, the only DTP tool I've used that seemed to understand page layout properly.
Cost a packet though, and we only had limited licences (again on Sun workstations). I often had the job of kicking FlexLM up the backside when it had a sulk.
I also had a row with the management when PCs started to infect the workplace. "You should be using Word for documentation" "But the Engineers all have Sun workstations on their desks, only the managers have PCs with Solitaire, er I mean Word...".
Nadella is slowly nailing the coffin of Office as well. He's killing Outlook, removing Publisher - which wasn't a great tool but good enough for some kind of simple publications. Soon Office would be just Word/Excel/Powerpoint, but even Word is far less useful that it was long ago. Next probably MS will kill Access.
Publisher could have been kept alive with a minimal development effort, but Nadella probably wants to cut costs as much as he can - everything should be in Azure now. But the more he pushes people to other software, the less Azure becomes their primary choice for their cloud - if they need a cloud.
Meanwhile Microsoft has nothing new to show an a desktop system. Just ugly apps to collect user data.
> Word is a word processor. Powerpoint is a presentation designer. Publisher was a desktop publisher. ....three completely different purposes. Along with typesetting software, they are unique products. But Word as an alternative? Only if you're just printing up a poster for a village fete
I used to work in printing. I know my Wang from my Goss, and can change 1,400 pound rolls of paper. Done that, finished.
I have hoarded a copy of Office/Word 2003 for over 20 years. It does letters and Lost Dog posters and mystery books and their covers (short-run) just fine, even on Win11. (I also have WordPerfect 5.1 archived, but is not so good with newer grafix files or Win32 or small-press editors.)
Stick your "backward compatibility" up your backside. Forward compatibility!
I used to use Publisher for the odd thing but haven't touched it in 20+ years.
I did use a desktop publisher to do my final year thesis at university in 1988 because, at the time, word processors couldn't cope with all the layout functionality. But now, I fear such programs are a bit of an anachronism, with paperless being the norm.
DTP programs were also useful for such things as getting books ready for actual printing. But there just isn't enough typesetting control in MS Publisher. Book publishers use programs like Adobe Indesign, which aren't exactly simple to use.
Small companies, nonprofits and schools will be missing out I suspect. But tools like Canva can fill the gap.
A number of local history group colleagues have used Word or one of the look-a-likes to produce A5 books in PDF form ready for the printer. Having then edited some of the out-or-print ones for our web-site I'm amazed that they haven't set the wrap for images but simply tabbed and spaced across or cropped images externally before inserting.
I'm currently working on my own book with LO using Lulu A5 Word template which sets the correct gutters etc. I looked at Scribus and decided it was easier to just use the word processor. Set wrapping, use tables, etc. The WP can look after cross-referencing of captions. WYSIWYG. Write the book as you'd like to read it.
One benefit of writing text and laying it out complete with maps and photographs means that the text can be written so as to place an image and its description on the same page or facing pages as far as possible. Thinking of the text, images and layout separately would, I think, make it a lot harder. Of course the coloured pencil wielders aren't going to concede that but as evidence I point to David Spiegelhalter's "The Art of Uncertainty". I don't think there's a single diagram whose description is in the same view - and the diagrams are often far too small even with a lot of white space on the page. It makes it a lot harder to read than it needed to be.
I have done a few books in A5 (and other) formats through Lulu. Accurate WYSIWYG view is essential if you are not to spend 10 years fighting the code so the PDF turns out right and text aligns properly with the piccies.
Also use LO. Positioning images can be a pig, as they can get lost and fail to be rendered, causing the whole thing to crash. Just you try finding a hidden image to remove it! Self-discipline essential. Indexing is an even worse pig, but then, so is everybody's.
Using Word, I was preparing an index of a book with many names: John Smith, Dave Evans, Sean Lafferty, etc. The Word indexer duly picked up the names as John Smith etc. Then a librarian colleague pointed out that names are conventionally indexed as Smith, John; Evans, Dave; and Lafferty, Sean.
If you want to write a book you go from idea to structure, from structure to text and from that content to layout and design. Each step has its own challenges (and review process), but I found it easiest to start in LO where, as an experiment, have also done some work on layout. It's OK, but only for relatively primitive stuff. I tried plain text editors first: good for initial focus but I like to have a view of where I am structurally and I don't get on well with tag-like systems. A bit of WYSIWYG is handy and LO does at least not make a pathetic mess of styles when you cut & paste like Word does, and it's very good handling styles (also its shortcuts are quite good, but I tend to swap the formatted paste with text-only paste shortcut.
Word is for larger documents a ticking time bomb because the larger your document gets, the closer you get to the point where the orphaned style codes its cut & paste produces cause it to crash, and worse, it will then fail to reload the file (but LO will still happily open it so that's your go to tool to then clean out the mess Word caused).
Now I'm not a DTP user, but I'm looking at Affinity Publisher. I'll have a lot to learn, but it does give me the feeling I'll manage, and the help is excellent (lots of online videos as well). Sure, I could leave it to a professional (aka someone who knows what he/she is doing) but learning is part of the fun and it means I get to a rough of what I think it needs to look like before I let someone loose on it who has the proper understanding of that part because it IS an art.
I find that if I want to get the text ans images related to each other it's an iterative process as the text gets shortened and lengthened as required. Trying to do that with multiple tools would be a nightmare. Fine for a coffee table book where you can dot a few things in the middle of white space nouvelle cuisine style but where there's tight discussion of images, no. I had a look at Scribus and realised it Just Wouldn't Work.
There are certainly things LO could do to help, staring out with being able to produce a proof of a 2-up layout starting with a recto page. You can edit that way but if you want a PDF or paper copy you have to put a dummy page there.
The approach has also brought out some serendipity. A wide but shallow map over a double-page spread left more than a page-worth of space to fill because the next page was booked for an image and accompanying text so I though I'd have to write some padding to fill it. We'd done a little research on an adjacent area for a contact-page query so it was in the back of my mind when I started commenting on a few things shown on the map. With the previous stuff in my mind I then realised that about 4 Acts of Parliament, the burgeoning industrial revolution and various other social historic factors had come together in the early C19th to create a special landscape and taking the writing in a whole new direction.
If you don't have a unified fornat or set of formats for your graphics as well as a consistent layout to integrate text and graphics (usually in form of a set of page templates) you'll never end up with a consistent or even acceptable layout. This is one of the iron rules of layout. The other one is always to set readability as the first priotity.
It's not the first document format to be abandoned and it won't be the last. I used to have a dozen odd pieces of software for decoding all the odd document formats I was asked to deal with. Tracking down (e.g.) the format some farmer had sent his accounts in as (an ancient graphics program) could be kind of fun.
Can text flow across boxes/frames/shapes, so it sequences properly on a complicated page layout? This is one DTP function I desperately miss in general office apps.
Can do something by formatting text as columns and persuading it to flow around overlapping images, but still very limited.
Some Affinity flow features are documented in YT. Maybe of interest to you? You seem to have complex needs which I think may be a tad beyond LO, Affinity Publisher has a few more features as it's explicitly focused on DTP.
No affilition, just a happy user for the last few years.
Microsoft say "Microsoft 365 subscribers will no longer be able to _open or edit_ Publisher files in Publisher".
You'd think they'd at least be able to manage a viewer. If you are a organisation with a lot of Publisher documents, basically you are f***ed. Definitely the "Extinguish" phase of Microsoft's MO :-(
This is the sort of control freak manipulation that you get with webware/subscription BS. Software that installed on your system would keep on working. That's why they hate it. No new features are required. so they have to 'take back control' from you to keep the money flowing in. Software empowered us. Webware unempowers us, on behalf of the abusive GAFA bloodsuckers.
I only use Publisher once a year... I create the programme for an amateur musical theatre group's annual production. Doing that in Word would be an absolute nightmare!
For a start, in Publisher you can edit a 2-page spread and have a photo that spans across both pages. As far as I'm aware, that's not (easily or accurately) possible in Word or PowerPoint.
I guess come 2026 I may need to look into some of the suggestions given here (I've already bookmarked Affinity).
Apart from Word and Excel, MS apps are not serious products. Publisher has already changed once, with the new version not able to open the old version's saved files. Personally I like to think that I'll be able to come back to things I've saved and reuse them. It is one of the great benefits of open source that this sort of thing doesn't tend to happen.
Microsoft has so much Previous in this. Often truly egregious. Mrs. 6 used to use Microsoft Money- and they produced a new version that could only read the older version files with a separate filter installed from the MS website. Once that went we had to stop using Money- because a reinstall/new PC would have meant the family accounts would be lost, so we cur our ties when we could.
Sadly, for the SOHO use case Publisher was a pretty good product- effectively free if you already had Office for its main programmes. Except Microsoft being Microsoft, it wasn't included in the Home version, where it would be most useful for users who want to create that football team fixture list/ am dram programme/church fete/menu card/bring and by sale/etc., just the Pro versions.
The death of PowerPoint will at least make corporate presentations and other "sit and watch slides while I drone on with fear-for-my-job enthusiasm" events somewhat less hellish.
The end of Publisher will hopefully see the end of people using it to create invitations and community board announcements full of shit clip-art and "wacky, fun" fonts.
You can position one image using MS's positioning tools. One image per page. It will take time, but it will work. Go ahead, try to position two images on the same page. I'll be over there with a bowl of popcorn.
What I did was to just dump images in and leave them alone until I exported the Word document to a real layout application: QuirkXCess, NotDesign, or, now, Affinity Publisher. It just wasn't worth the time and effort to try.
It used to be much worse.
As soon as MS made the announcement to customers, my church lady coworker asked me what she could do to continue her work for her community. She *was* using the MS 365 suite.
It's LibreOffice for her and maybe Scribus is she has to open old publisher files at some point.
She is happy to cancel her MS subscription and go open-source. It's long overdue--maybe for many people.
You can buy a 10Tb hard drive for under £200, use software that works on it, use another as a back up and kiss goodbye to the 50 shades of failure that are AI, Co-pilot, W11, updates that crash things, cloud failures, back doors, cross border data restrictions, Govt spyware, hackers and all the rest.
This offers a new renaissance in the market for non-cloud software (and non-AI software) that keeps your data safe from being spied on or snaffled.
We are better off going back to the future, using systems that are not networked to work on. Just transfer stuff to a networked system when you need to distribute it.
Maybe El Reg could do a feature on software-as-an-application rather than a service that is still going strong, and retro packages that still work.
Leave the subscription lock-ins and AI for the mugs who believe the hype.
Many years ago I worked in publishing, as the senior pre-press guy for a newspaper. The newspaper would do print jobs for outside clients, on our nice big web press, on newsprint, or, if the client paid enough, on glossy paper instead. We _hated_ Publisher. If a print job came in in Publisher format, we sent it back and told the client to resubmit in Word or PDF. Or a real publishing format, like PageMaker, QuarkXpress, or Adobe InDesign. Most professionals felt the same way. Publisher simply wasn't any good. To this day I use Publisher only to export Publisher files to a useful format. That loud 'Hooo-ray' you heard was publishing and printing pros world-wide expressing their delight at Publisher's demise.
Replacements for it, which would actually work?
1. Word. If you know what you're doing Word is an... okay... layout application. It is definitely lacking in many ways, but will work for most amateur requirements. Yes, you can lay out the double-page church notice poster, if you try; format the thing as a single-page tabloid document (other large page formats available) and print portrait to a printer capable of printing to tabloid (or whatever) pages. There are other ways to get the same general effect. It's not nearly as good as a real two-page layout, but it'll work. Just be careful with columns, and tables, and images.. Especially images. Microsoft has improved how Word handles images over the years. There was a LOT of room for improvement. There still is.
2. Pages. Pages is a much better layout app than Word. It's still not a pro layout tool, but it can be made to work much more easily than Word can. Apple ships Pages with every Mac and iDevice and the web version, which works in Windows and Linux, has most of the real app's features. It's not ideal, but it's better than Word. And it's free, unlike Word. (Well, free as long as you have a Mac or iDevice or an Apple account, anyway...) And it actually handles images in an almost acceptable way.
3. Affinity Publisher. The New Gold Standard. The reason why I bailed from InDesign (well, that, and Adobe were being greedy bastards, not that that's news). The full Affinity suite, Designer, Photo, and Publisher, is available for Mac, Windows, and iDevice for $165 (plus tax). That's a one-time payment of $165 (plus tax) for all three on all three platforms. https://affinity.serif.com/en-us/publisher/#buy Affinity Publisher is very good indeed. Note that there is a try before you buy option.
Fine, but misses the point that no one (as far as I'm aware, but who knows?) proposes Publisher for pro DTP.
It's an ideal SOHO product for one-off jobs. Today's menu or team sheet, or party invitations. Or A4 posters for the church bazaar, or a scout meeting and so forth.
I haven't used Publisher, but can attest to the challenges in formatting complex documents in Word. The government R&D organization I used to work for, having gotten into the branding bandwagon, had a consultant design a new R&D document format. The complexity of the new document format resulted in VERY unstable formatting. One would spend hours trying to get the formatting correct after a few minor edits.
"Anyone who has tried to position items in Word, only to have the careful formatting of a document go horrendously awry due to a misplaced pixel, would likely take a step backward before trying to recreate that parish noticeboard page in the application."
Just use the text wrapping menu. These days it's a context menu that shows up when you click on an image, I think in the pre-Ribbon days it may have been buried in a menu. If left at default images do the whole jumping-around thing. But with other wrapping options it works much more nicely.
This hasn't been a problem since about the 1990s, can we please retire this as a joke and just use it as a prompt that an old person needs a hand?
It's what I hate about office365.You pay a subscription so that ms can just hoist the same crappy functionality on to you. Once they have you hooked they have no incentive for improvement
Picture formatting has been terrible from day one in word you would if thought after all those billions in profit gained, someone might of got around to improve it, but apparently not
Yes, graphics are not a problem and better on many other softwares but ... here's a challenge...
The big big loss, that no other software does in the same hyper easy useful way is print multiple pages per sheet. Publisher allows you to create bespoke page sizes and print multiple pages (mail merged and or double-sided) sheets. This is so so useful for tickets, cards, passes, slips etc.
To date there's NO other software that offers print bespoke page sizes multiple pages per sheet!
Challenge find an alternative! ?