Re: Tools statistics

Subject: Re: Tools statistics
From: Chris Morton <salt -dot- morton -at- gmail -dot- com>
To: techwr-l -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com
Date: Tue, 24 Sep 2013 11:54:29 -0700

I've been a Windows user since I was introduced to it by way of Aldus
PageMaker 1.0a in the late '80s. Windows was itself very much in its
infancy, but I stuck with it (and it subsequently paid off in spades, but
that's another story). I was brought into this tech writing world as a a
bit of a PM guru; I took my FM baptismal much later.

The point is that I've long been married to both Windows UI conventions and
to the flexible layout and typesetting capabilities afforded by "the Aldus
methodology" (or however John Warnock phrased it). That Framemaker ignores
both rubs me the wrong way, inasmuch as it's my belief that a Windows app
should at least make an *attempt* at adhering to known M$ GUI conventions
(right or wrong)—just like Apple rides herd over Mac-centric apps and their
compliance.

Much like other noted Adobe product deficiencies, I see this as nothing
more than that company's bean counters not wanting to devote resources to
retooling FM's UI. I get that it's a business decision, but I'm left
wanting... not that I'm in love with ID, either.

> Chris


On Tue, Sep 24, 2013 at 11:40 AM, Robert Lauriston <robert -at- lauriston -dot- com>wrote:

> I found FrameMaker 10 unusable until I gave up on the window
> arrangement and keyboard shortcuts I'd been using for over ten years
> and instead left the UI in its default configuration and did things
> with the mouse as necessary. After that it was just considerably less
> efficient when performing many common tasks. I used it for over a
> year, but being able to switch to other tools was certainly one of my
> incentives for changing jobs.
>
> The UI semi-makeover Adobe layered on top of FrameMaker starting in
> version 9 could be a useful negative example in a human interface
> design class. They made a lot of things more awkward without
> addressing fundamental limitations that date back to its start on
> UNIX, most notably fixed-sized scrolling lists. It's bizarre to have a
> proprietary UI for an application that runs only on Windows.
>
> On Tue, Sep 24, 2013 at 11:18 AM, Scott Turner <quills -at- airmail -dot- net> wrote:
> > Thanks for the link on the perceived bugs.
> >
> > After reviewing them I find that the only one that I have encountered is
> the Find focus issue. To categorize it as making it unusable seems extreme
> to me. I have bigger issues with the Windows behaviors and my network
> inconsistencies which, for me, cause true usability problems.
> >
> > The user preferences will always color the perception if a tools
> usability.
>
>
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> New! Doc-to-Help 2013 features the industry's first HTML5 editor for
> authoring.
>
> Learn more: http://bit.ly/ZeOZeQ
>
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>
> You are currently subscribed to TECHWR-L as salt -dot- morton -at- gmail -dot- com -dot-
>
> To unsubscribe send a blank email to
> techwr-l-leave -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com
>
>
> Send administrative questions to admin -at- techwr-l -dot- com -dot- Visit
> http://www.techwhirl.com/email-discussion-groups/ for more resources and
> info.
>
> Looking for articles on Technical Communications? Head over to our online
> magazine at http://techwhirl.com
>
> Looking for the archived Techwr-l email discussions? Search our public
> email archives @ http://techwr-l.com/archives
>


^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
New! Doc-to-Help 2013 features the industry's first HTML5 editor for authoring.

Learn more: http://bit.ly/ZeOZeQ

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

You are currently subscribed to TECHWR-L as archive -at- web -dot- techwr-l -dot- com -dot-

To unsubscribe send a blank email to
techwr-l-leave -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com


Send administrative questions to admin -at- techwr-l -dot- com -dot- Visit
http://www.techwhirl.com/email-discussion-groups/ for more resources and info.

Looking for articles on Technical Communications? Head over to our online magazine at http://techwhirl.com

Looking for the archived Techwr-l email discussions? Search our public email archives @ http://techwr-l.com/archives


Follow-Ups:

References:
Re: Tools statistics: From: Peter Gold
Re: Tools statistics: From: Scott Turner
Re: Tools statistics: From: Robert Lauriston

Previous by Author: Re: Tools statistics
Next by Author: RE: What's in a title?
Previous by Thread: Re: Tools statistics
Next by Thread: RE: Tools statistics


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

Sponsored Ads


Sponsored Ads