Summary--FrameMaker on UNIX Workstations--Part II of II (long)

Subject: Summary--FrameMaker on UNIX Workstations--Part II of II (long)
From: Binion Amerson <aba -at- OC -dot- COM>
Date: Tue, 6 Dec 1994 13:11:42 -0600

Continuation of Part I

On 28 Nov 94 09:43:48 -0600, Donna_McLean-LDM013 -at- email -dot- mot -dot- com wrote:

>We are running in a similar environment ... engineers on Unix and writers on
>Macs. We have opted to put Frame on both environments and move the necessary
>documents between the platforms in MIF format using ftp. It has been working
>very well. Frame is quite compatable, and easily passes from one format to
>the
>other.

On Mon, 28 Nov 94 11:05:29 MST, Michael LaTorra <mikel -at- accugraph -dot- com> wrote:
>In response to your questions:

>Have you had any problems with FrameMaker on the UNIX machines?
>==> Very few problems during the past 3 years of use. The only
>one is minor: to display certain graphics, more swap memory must
>be allocated.


>What UNIX hardware are you using?
>==> Hewlett-Packard Model 713 (RISC chip, 60 MHz)


>How is your UNIX system configurated?
>==> I am not sure whether you mean both hardware and software
>configuration, or just one of those. My workstation runs
>HP UNIX v9.01 and it acts as a license server for Frame.
>It is networked using Ethernet.


>What Version Control software are you using for archiving FrameMakre binary
>files?
>==> We are not using version control software. Version control is
>achieved by the manual technique of saving filename-dated versions
>of document chapters.


On Mon, 28 Nov 1994 13:41:59 -0800, cortesi -at- barchester -dot- wpd -dot- sgi -dot- com (David
Cortesi) wrote:

>I have used Frame on Sun, NeXT, Windows, Mac, and SGI machines.

>>Have you had any problems with FrameMaker on the UNIX machines?

>Frame's support for NeXT was miserable. Using the NeXT was
>like working in outer Slobovia in that we were completely isolated
>from the mainstream.

>Moral: choose a platform that is well-supported.

>Frame on a Sparc was OK, but the surrounding Sun software
>was clunky and hard to work with.

>>What UNIX hardware are you using?

>Currently an SGI Indy. (Wide smug grin :-)

>>How is your UNIX system configurated?

>64MB RAM, 1GB disk, 20-inch color monitor, CDROM, DAT (grin gets wider :-)

>>What Version Control software are you using for archiving FrameMaker binary
>>files?

>RCS -- SGI has a very elaborate in-house change control
>system based on RCS and proprietary configuration management tools.

>>What UNIX software are you using for email? Is it a GUI interface? Can you
>>send and receive attached files?

>SGI's MediaMail (which is a bundled version of the ZMail product).
>It has full support for graphics, sound, postscript and Mime-encodings.

On Tue, 29 Nov 94 09:37:16 -0500, jeffrey -at- lemond -dot- hks -dot- com (Glenda Jeffrey) wrote:
>: Have you had any problems with FrameMaker on the UNIX machines?

>Not really -- no problems that are strictly Unix related, anyway.

>Oh wait -- there is one. I found that when I use Frame graphics
>in conjunction with imported postscript files (that is, I import
>the postscript file, and then use the Frame graphics toolbox to
>annotate the figure or draw other stuff in the same anchored frame),
>the Frame graphics is not positioned on paper as it is on the screen.
>That is, the Frame graphics is usually a pixel or two off -- which
>makes things difficult if you are trying to draw arrows to point to
>things in the PostScript figure.

>I talked to the Frame people -- they blamed it on the SGI's handling
>of PostScript as it is drawn on the screen. I don't know if they were
>right or not. The person I spoke to was Phil Fleibish -- he never did
>really get back to me with a satisfactory answer.

>: What UNIX hardware are you using?

>SGI Indy

>: How is your UNIX system configurated?

>Most of our systems have 48 Mb of memory with 1 Gb of disk.

>: What Version Control software are you using for archiving FrameMaker binary
>: files?

>Clearcase.

>: What UNIX software are you using for email? Is it a GUI interface? Can you
>: send and receive attached files?

>Zmail -- has a GUI interface and sends/receives attached files, including
>Frame MIF files.

On Tue, 29 Nov 1994 11:31:58 -0500, Kelly Hoffman <kelly -at- nashua -dot- hp -dot- com> wrote:


>Preface: I started with FrameMaker v. 3.x on a Macintosh IIcx 8/100
>and upgraded to a Quadra 800 24/500. After switching jobs, I now use
>FrameMaker v. 4.x and FrameBuilder 1.0 on a PowerBook Duo 270c 12/240
>and an HP 9000/712 ("Gecko") workstation with 80/1G, respectively.

> > Have you had any problems with FrameMaker on the UNIX machines?

>Frame/Unix works pretty much like FM on the Mac, except there's a
>floating license manager (which works pretty much without
>intervention). Font handling is messier with FM/Unix -- it's
>infinitely easier to install & use fonts on the Mac than on the Unix
>platforms.

>I also had to adjust to the lack of third-party graphics packages
>available. Most of my graphics are screenshots or line drawings done
>directly in Frame. Once and awhile, I have to do something a little
>more complex, and I usually resort to Freehand on the Mac, print to
>a PostScript file, convert to EPSI using ghostscript on the Unix
>machine, then import into Frame. It's a bit messy, but it works.

> > What UNIX hardware are you using?

>As mentioned, an HP 9000/712 with 80 MB memory and 1 GB hard disk,
>HP-UX v. 9.0.3. (As with Frame on any platform, get lots of memory,
>you'll need it.) The Gecko is a sweet, nimble machine, and it's
>relatively inexpensive as Unix boxes go.

> > What Version Control software are you using for archiving FrameMakre binary
> > files?

>ClearCase, from Atria software. Our developers use it, so I do, too.

>The question I have for you is: Why are you thinking about switching?
>Performance? The stuff you're documenting runs on Unix machines?
>Some other reason? Seems to me that the incentive for switching is an
>important part of the justification for switching. ;-)

On Tue, 29 Nov 1994 14:25:21 -0500, pershng -at- watson -dot- ibm -dot- com (John A.
Pershing) wrote:

>I don't have a whole lot of experience (yet), but I can tell you that
>'Maker in an X-Windows/Unix environment has got some performance
>problems. We're trying to use it on various and sundry IBM machines:
>the whole range of RS/6000 from small to very large, plus various
>PowerPC based machines. It seems to generate the most gawd-awful X
>datastream that you can possibly imagine, which seems to consume large
>quantities of processor power to render on the tube. I'm personally at
>a disadvantage, as I'm using a 486-based PS/2 Model 95 running OS/2 with
>an X server as part of its TCP/IP suite, remotely accessing a big RS6K.
>The OS/2 X server is not known for its performance, and I can easily
>type two or three words ahead of 'Maker. However, others who are
>running this in an all-native AIX environment (and/or with a "real"
>X-station) also report performance problems. We are guessing that it
>is rendering all of the fonts internally and sending bitmaps to the X
>server; there is also evidence that it repaints the entire current line
>every time that you type in an additional character -- this makes it
>impossible to use it, e.g., from home over a 19.2 connection.

>We're running this on vanilla AIX systems. We haven't noticed any
>problems (yet) other than performance, although we haven't really been
>stressing it yet. So far, we have been using its built-in "locking"
>facility to keep from stepping on each other's files, but one of our
>members has been lobbying for us to start using a "real" version control
>system (called 'RCS' or something -- I know nothing about it).

>What I have been doing is running the Windows version of 'Maker in an
>OS/2 window-box, and mostly avoiding the AIX version (due to the
>performance problems). The Windows version is reasonable, although it
>also suffers some performance problems (probably due to the fact that it
>is running in an OS/2 window box, and I don't know anything about tuning
>the performance of this environment) -- but at least it keeps up with me
>when I'm typing in text.

>I don't know what they have here for mail transport: I mostly do mail on
>VM (a mainframe operating system); when I have to do mail on AIX, I tend
>to use RMAIL under EMACS.

On Wed, 30 Nov 1994 09:09:55 -0500, Kelly Hoffman <kelly -at- nashua -dot- hp -dot- com> wrote:

>Preface: I started with FrameMaker v. 3.x on a Macintosh IIcx 8/100
>and upgraded to a Quadra 800 24/500. After switching jobs, I now use
>FrameMaker v. 4.x and FrameBuilder 1.0 on a PowerBook Duo 270c 12/240
>and an HP 9000/712 ("Gecko") workstation with 80/1G, respectively.

> > Have you had any problems with FrameMaker on the UNIX machines?

>Frame/Unix works pretty much like FM on the Mac, except there's a
>floating license manager (which works pretty much without
>intervention). Font handling is messier with FM/Unix -- it's
>infinitely easier to install & use fonts on the Mac than on the Unix
>platforms.

>I also had to adjust to the lack of third-party graphics packages
>available. Most of my graphics are screenshots or line drawings done
>directly in Frame. Once and awhile, I have to do something a little
>more complex, and I usually resort to Freehand on the Mac, print to
>a PostScript file, convert to EPSI using ghostscript on the Unix
>machine, then import into Frame. It's a bit messy, but it works.

> > What UNIX hardware are you using?

>As mentioned, an HP 9000/712 with 80 MB memory and 1 GB hard disk,
>HP-UX v. 9.0.3. (As with Frame on any platform, get lots of memory,
>you'll need it.) The Gecko is a sweet, nimble machine, and it's
>relatively inexpensive as Unix boxes go.

> > What Version Control software are you using for archiving FrameMakre binary
> > files?

>ClearCase, from Atria software. Our developers use it, so I do, too.


On Wed, 30 Nov 1994 11:25:53 -0500, Kelly Hoffman <kelly -at- nashua -dot- hp -dot- com>
further wrote in response as to why we may be switching to UNIX
workstations:

> > Our software developers are on UNIX machines and our product is
> > UNIX based.

>When I started here about a year ago, I was the first tech writer at
>this site (we're small ;-). As such, I was asked to do a proposal for
>the equipment I wanted. They were pretty willing to get me whatever I
>requested, as long as it could run FrameMaker and wasn't outrageously
>expensive.

>Even though I'm something of a Mac bigot, I requested a Unix
>workstation because that's what our products require. It's much
>easier to do all of the work on one system, even if it has meant some
>compromises.

>The HP corporate fonts aren't in the standard Frame font set, so I get
>by with their closest alternatives. Many groups in HP have the same
>problem; they either use PCs or they do what I do. While it's
>possible to bring the Adobe fonts into FM for Unix, the results are
>not satisfactory -- for some reason, you can't get at all of the
>special characters.

>Other than that, and the occasional need for something like FreeHand,
>I've been pretty pleased with the way things have worked out. (If I
>needed FreeHand's capabilities more often, I'd investigate a
>Unix-based alternative, like Island Draw or CorelDraw.)

>However, I do miss being able to use my to-do list manager (Attain's
>In Control) on my system at work. I have it on my PowerBook, but
>since it's not as convenient, I don't use it to the same extent I used
>to. I'd really like to find a good PIM for Unix systems. Know of
>any? ;-)


Thanks again to all that responded.

We are now looking at costs and details involved with upgrading our
Macintosh IIcis to PowerPCs. After receiving all responses and after
consulting with our MIS depart, we will decide as which environment to
continue our documentation.

Binion Amerson


****************************************************************************
Binion Amerson, Senior Technical Writer, OpenConnect Systems, 2711 LBJ, Ste
800, Dallas, TX 75234, Ph 214/888-0447; Fax 214/484-6100; E-mail aba -at- oc -dot- com
Director-Sponsor, Society for Technical Communication (STC) Region 5.
****************************************************************************


Previous by Author: Summary--FrameMaker on UNIX Workstations--Part I of II (long)
Next by Author: The Net Before Christmas
Previous by Thread: Summary--FrameMaker on UNIX Workstations--Part I of II (long)
Next by Thread: Re: Script-to-WP Conversion


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


Sponsored Ads