RE: Help! Framemaker vs. Quark

Subject: RE: Help! Framemaker vs. Quark
From: "Brierley, Sean" <Sean -at- Quodata -dot- Com>
To: "'S'" <kittenbreath -at- hotbot -dot- com>, TECHWR-L <techwr-l -at- lists -dot- raycomm -dot- com>
Date: Wed, 10 May 2000 14:03:58 -0400

Sounds like a marketing powerplay. Cool!

If you're up for it, Quark can do a 40-pager, sure, you might need some
add-ons, some training, a bucketload of patience, and your projects might
take a lot longer, certainly in the interim . . .. Heck, I'd be tempted to
give 'em what they want and pad the resume <vbg>.

What capabilities does Quark offer a technical document? Color. Are your
docs in color? Are you planning to put them out in color? Do you need to
share files with marketing? You can share graphics and PDFs without needing
to share application source files. What other reasons are quoted for moving
to Quark?

FrameMaker is for structured, technical documents that use TOCs and indexes
and other generated lists, and cross-references, etc. FrameMaker in Windows
isn't so good at color . . . but it can be forced into it with third-party
products. FrameMaker goes well to HTML, XML, and especially to PDF. Quark
might not be so good with indexes and TOCs and tables and cross-refs, etc.
Plus, you will suffer downtime for switching packages. Also, any FrameMaker
documents you have will probably need to be completely re-done in Quark
because RTF is the only way to move files between these products.

You could suggest that the marketing dept. switch to Adobe InDesign, not
that it'll be any better with FrameMaker but it will raise some eyebrows

Best regards, er . . . kittenbreath??

sean -at- quodata -dot- com

> -----Original Message-----
> From: S [SMTP:kittenbreath -at- hotbot -dot- com]
> Sent: Wednesday, May 10, 2000 1:33 PM
> Subject: Help! Framemaker vs. Quark
> I am hoping someone can help me with a budding problem.
> I am the only technical writer in my company. As part of the engineering
> department, I am constantly at odds with our marketing department, which
> sees things very differently than anyone else.
> The latest battle with them came this morning when the marketing director
> wrote me and my boss (the VP of R&E) an email saying it would be a good
> idea to switch me from using Framemaker over to Quark, which is what
> marketing uses.
> I don't like Quark, although if I am forced to use it, I won't mind
> learning it to put on my resume.
> Most of our product manuals are from 9 to 40 pages long. Can anyone on
> this list please tell me the pros and cons of using Framemaker or Quark,
> or vice versa?
> I'm meeting with my boss later today to discuss it. I want to be prepared
> about the pros and cons. I did a lot of web searching today but didn't
> find very much.

Previous by Author: RE: System Requirements
Next by Author: RE: Framemaker vs. Quark
Previous by Thread: Re: Help! Framemaker vs. Quark
Next by Thread: RE: Help! Framemaker vs. Quark

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

Sponsored Ads