Re: Word vs Ventura vs Framemaker

Subject: Re: Word vs Ventura vs Framemaker
From: Mike Adams <mike -at- TELESPH -dot- COM>
Date: Fri, 2 Feb 1996 23:01:02 GMT

MTR -at- addix -dot- swb -dot- de (Mark Torben Rudolph) mentioned:

>Greetings,

>> That said, I would never consider using Word or WordPerfect to publish a
>> hundred-page, fully illustrated and indexed manual. That would be like
>> trying to drive a nail with a pair of pliers: sure, you can do it, but who
>> needs the aggro?

>Oh don't say that, I have layouted several books with over 500 pages
>(all fully indexed and with many illustrations) using Word for Windows 6.0
>and it is the easiest to use while giving you the most automatisms.
>IMHO.


Sure, you can do anything in Word. But why? Word is nice for small
things, but the ease of use it gives is offset by the problems it has
in reproducing exacting margins and object placement. Table
manipulation is another area where Word lacks the sophistication
offered by a purpose-built DTP program. Just for example, try to add a
table within a table. Word also lacks the ability to straddle ("merge
cells" in Word) cells within a column.

Word is great for many smaller projects, but for DTP it is sadly
lacking in the refinements that the average DTP program has as
standard equipment. Multiple master pages, strong table formatting,
versatile list generation (fonts used, cites, authors, etc.) are
examples. You can generate lists in Word, but the effort it requries
is inordinate.

For my money (and time, which I _can't_ replace) FrameMaker is the
tool for the job.


Previous by Author: How many writers does it take to ...
Next by Author: Re: Word 6.0 TOC errors
Previous by Thread: Word vs Ventura vs Framemaker
Next by Thread: Re: Word vs Ventura vs Framemaker


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

Sponsored Ads


Sponsored Ads