TechWhirl (TECHWR-L) is a resource for technical writing and technical communications professionals of all experience levels and in all industries to share their experiences and acquire information.
For two decades, technical communicators have turned to TechWhirl to ask and answer questions about the always-changing world of technical communications, such as tools, skills, career paths, methodologies, and emerging industries. The TechWhirl Archives and magazine, created for, by and about technical writers, offer a wealth of knowledge to everyone with an interest in any aspect of technical communications.
A problem you will find is that there is no absolute $ vs. time data out
there to share. I can tell you from experience that writing a perfect-bound
book, with four color cover, 600 pages, an average of four graphics--some
screen grabs some not--and publishing to offset press (and later to
docutech) was like pulling teeth with a rusty spoon in word 95/97. Rework
alone for a variety of problems, template corruption from normal.dot,
autonumbering problems, various iterations of the red X syndrome (no longer
an issue, I understand), not to mention the tedious nature of positioning
graphics in Word, in a page-layout kind of way, cost me probably weeks of
time . . . more than enough time to offset the $800 or so cost of
FrameMaker. (Regardless of tools, I recommend formal training, too, and have
sent employees to both FrameMaker and Word classes--so training dollars
aren't really an issue.)
However, for ubiquity, if others need to edit your source files (ugh!), if
you need to be integrated with other MS Office tools, like Access, for
availability in foreign lands, there is a good case to be made for MS Word .
In short, if you find a dollar vs. time answer, I would very much appreciate
you sharing. However, though I prefer FrameMaker strongly over Word (and
Ventura . . . etc.), a tool's a tool and the talent behind the tool makes
all the difference in the world.
sean -at- quodata -dot- com
From: Jason Allen [SMTP:jasnallen -at- yahoo -dot- com]
I've just signed on to the list and have a question. First though, I
have looked at the archives. There must be a ton or two of info
regarding these two applications and their earlier versions.
that is not going to get me to the place I need to go.
I have an opportunity to convince my VP that we should change from
2000 (on a pc) to FrameMaker 6.0. I can give them reasons but they
not specific enough. He's looking for $/time saved, etc. in addition
all the rest.
My question is what are the positive and negative points for these