Re: Worthless Tech Comm Degrees

Subject: Re: Worthless Tech Comm Degrees
From: Andrew Plato <intrepid_es -at- yahoo -dot- com>
To: Techwrl-l <techwr-l -at- lists -dot- raycomm -dot- com>
Date: Fri, 24 Mar 2000 08:26:06 -0800 (PST)

"Carnall, Jane" <Jane -dot- Carnall -at- compaq -dot- com> wrote in message
news:41703 -at- techwr-l -dot- -dot- -dot-
> >FrameMaker is totally, utterly, one billion percent irrelevant if your
> >document contains inaccurate, misleading, or disorganized information. This
> is
> >why the remainder of the known universe thinks FrameMaker is a big,
> bloated,
> >useless dinosaur. Because only tech writers have this bizarre, quasi-sexual
> >attachment to it.
> You know, this is completely bizarre. Is Andrew Plato really of the opinion
> that using FrameMaker to create a document will automatically create a
> document that contains inaccurate, misleading, or disorganised information?

I am of the opinion that FrameMaker is an unnecessarily complex and horribly
designed tool lorded over and worshiped by tech writers for the sole reason
that it provides job security to people who haven't a clue about the things
they document. Many of these writers obsess over the intricacies of Frame and
never once take a moment to learn the products and technologies they're
supposed to document.

Many non-tech writers find Frame archaic and difficult to use. I can quote
numerous conversations with CTOs and Engineering Directors who said they
wouldn't use FrameMaker if God himself came down and ordered them.

Now - I don't care what intricate, meaningful and profound theories people have
regarding Frame. To me, it is just a tool and I have to use it sometimes. There
are things it can do well, there are things it does horribly. My problem is not
necessarily with the tool, it is the bizarre religious fanaticism that consumes
some people at the expense of understanding the products/technologies being

> Or that because FrameMaker is a tool for technical writers, it is a big,
> bloated, useless dinosaur?
> But then Andrew's not a tech writer: he runs an employment agency for tech
> writers. Is this yet another example of "Them that can, does: them that
> can't...?"

I was a tech writer for close to 11 years. I am an active writer/consultant at
my company. I just finished writing a doc set last week for a client. I am no
writing genius, but I have pounded out a fair tonnage of documentation.

Lastly, my company, Anitian Consulting, staffs all IT positions not just tech

Andrew Plato

Do You Yahoo!?
Talk to your friends online with Yahoo! Messenger.

Previous by Author: Suggested Tech Comm Curriculum
Next by Author: Re: Andrew's Dream Curriculum
Previous by Thread: Re: Worthless Tech Comm Degrees
Next by Thread: Re: Worthless Tech Comm Degrees

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

Sponsored Ads

Sponsored Ads