Re: FrameMaker vs. PageMaker

Subject: Re: FrameMaker vs. PageMaker
From: "Curtis Brautigam" <curtisb -at- nurserysupplies -dot- com>
To: "TECHWR-L digest" <techwr-l -at- lists -dot- raycomm -dot- com>
Date: Wed, 22 Mar 2000 08:34:02 -0500

I am familiar with both programs, but your choice depends on what is the
main type of writing. Comparing FrameMaker and PageMaker is like comparing
apples and oranges. I do think that technical writing education programs
should teach people how to use FrameMaker. However, there are uses for

-- If you are involved in marketing writing, brochures, and newsletters, I
would recommend PageMaker. PageMaker is an excellent desktop publishing and
page layout tool. It is relatively easy to use, and you have much more
flexibility with page layout than you would with FrameMaker. I would not
consider FrameMaker a competitor in this category of desktop publishing.
However, the main competitor to FrameMaker in this category is Quark
X-Press. I have not seen Quark, but I do know that Quark has its proponents,
and there are frequent holy wars between PageMaker and Quark. Of course,
there is also In Design, which is also made by Adobe.

-- For long technical documents, I definitely recommend FrameMaker.
PageMaker is clearly inadequate for this task. FrameMaker also has excellent
page layout features, but these features are more geared to the long
technical documents as opposed to marketing brochures. FrameMaker's main
competitor in this area is Interleaf (I have not seen Interleaf, so I cannot
judge). FrameMaker has become the tool of choice for the technical writing

Curtis R. Brautigam
Technical Writer
Nursery Supplies, Inc.
Chambersburg, PA.

Previous by Author: Resume Length
Next by Author: Re: Education of a Technical Writer
Previous by Thread: Re: Framemaker vs. Pagemaker
Next by Thread: RE: Framemaker vs. Pagemaker

What this post helpful? Share it with friends and colleagues:

Sponsored Ads

Sponsored Ads