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.
Subject:Re: Why Frame not Word? From:Glen Accardo <glen -at- SOFTINT -dot- COM> Date:Thu, 12 Jan 1995 11:49:22 -0600
> Upper management in my company is exerting pressure for
> the documentation people to jump on the Word bandwagon
> and abandon our dearly beloved FrameMaker. I'm now
> in the process of drafting a report on the advantages
> of Frame and the disadvantages of Word.
Never discuss politics, religion, or word processors.
Seriously, I've had to deal with similar requests before. And while
management seems to think that each product is idendical but Frame
costs 3x as much, that simply is NOT the case.
Take features such as paragraph formats. List what frame and word
do. Then list HOW. Frame (for me) starts getting better than word
when you see HOW paragraph formats work in a document and more importantly,
how they work accross multiple documents. I would also emphasize
items such as FrameMaker's master pages, reference pages, and ability
to work with color.
Bottom line is, if you compare feature to feature, both do pretty much
the same stuff. But, if you look at how each accomplishes the task of
putting stuff onto paper, then you see why one outshines the other.
glen accardo glen -at- softint -dot- com
Software Interfaces, Inc. (713) 492-0707 x122
Houston, TX 77084