PageMaker, FrameMaker, and Quark XPress

Subject: PageMaker, FrameMaker, and Quark XPress
From: "Scott J. Wilson" <scott -at- WWTC -dot- TIMEPLEX -dot- COM>
Date: Fri, 5 May 1995 07:50:50 -0700

Romay wrote:

>Last year PC Magazine listed Pagemaker, FrameMaker, and QuarkXPress as
>the top three DTP programs. They ran a comparison chart showing the
>various features. I don't seem to have that issue any longer, but from
>what I remember, Pagemaker was the most versatile overall, but was less
>satisfactory for very long documents. FrameMaker was less versatile, but
>showed a superior ability to handle long documents. QuarkXPress was
>described as being possible superior to FrameMaker in handling long
>documents, but is much more difficult to learn.


Personally, I think that this thread should be number one in the techwr-l
FAQ (if one is ever created).

Romay has made a mistake with her last sentence.

Quark XPress is *not* superior to FrameMaker, not even possibly superior, in
handling long documents. In fact, XPress is the worst of these three in
handling long documents like manuals. FrameMaker is best, but has a very
steep learning curve; PageMaker is second best for manuals and other long
documents because of its built-in text editor and book features. XPress is
best at advertisements, brochures, and newsletters.

I teach all three of these programs on Mac and Windows. If there are any
more questions about them, I'd be happy to respond to *personal* e-mail.


Scott J. Wilson
scott -at- wwtc -dot- timeplex -dot- com
70541,1466
(310) 443-4028


Previous by Author: One Word Oxymoron - (better late . . .)
Next by Author: ISDN, ISBN, ISQN ... whatever it takes
Previous by Thread: Re: 1099 Issues
Next by Thread: job shops in DC-MD-VA area?


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

Sponsored Ads


Sponsored Ads