Re: Frame Deficiencies

Subject: Re: Frame Deficiencies
From: "Wing, Michael J" <mjwing -at- INGR -dot- COM>
Date: Mon, 8 Jul 1996 15:19:30 -0500

>>>If you are not inspired by a vested interest in FrameMaker, will you
>>>honestly post what you consider the 5 biggest deficiencies of FrameMaker
>>>to this forum?

>Actually, the question itself is meaningless, because the "5 biggest
>deficiencies" is about as subjective as it can get.

In other words, no.

>I could pick faults all day with every package I've ever used. I
>suspect, however,
>that the question was not designed to sort the wheat from the chaff,
>but to challenge
>those of us who supposedly steal bread from the mouths of babes by

No, the question was designed to determine if you are approaching this
topic with a Marketing agenda. That is, are you using this topic to
direct Technical Writers into possible procuring your products and
services? If so, is your Marketing approach based on making your
products and services look good by making other products and services
look bad? If my agenda was to use this forum to peddle my wares and
services, I would also dodge the question.

>The question isn't which five features (or lack thereof) are the most
>troublesome, but whether those are reason enough to leave behind the
>benefits of the package.

Agreed. If the package is worth dealing with the deficiencies to use
(which I believe both FrameMaker and Word are), then there should be no
risk is listing what you feel are the shortcomings of FrameMaker (you
certainly have no reservations on bashing Word). I believe that you are
quite knowledgeable and proficient with FrameMaker, therefore you should
easily be able to list five more-than-minor flaws with the product. If,
however, you have a Marketing agenda, you will go to any length not to
put your product/services (or products/services that depend on the
package) in a bad light.

>In this case, I have to agree that the answer is no.

I thought so :^).

>In the world of page design, Word is a corporate jet, but FrameMaker is
>a 777. Every pilot has faults to pick with an aircraft, but that
>keep anyone on the ground. You merely pick the aircraft that serves
>needs and fly it as best you can. In our case, we so often need the
>power of
>FrameMaker that we seldom recommend using Word. By the time we're
>called in,
>the project has usually outgrown ANY word processor. It's a matter of
>tradeoffs, and we gladly trade FrameMaker's quirkiness for its
>horsepower. We simply learn to live with the drawbacks and work around
>when we need to.

Now if this had been your demeanor in the original post, I may not have
been so irascible (well, until the next debate).

Mike Wing

_/ Michael Wing
_/ Principal Technical Writer
_/ Jupiter Customization and Educational Services
_/ Intergraph Corporation
_/ 730-7250
_/ mjwing -at- ingr -dot- com

TECHWR-L List Information
To send a message about technical communication to 2500+ list readers,
E-mail to TECHWR-L -at- LISTSERV -dot- OKSTATE -dot- EDU -dot- Send administrative commands
ALL other questions or problems concerning the list
should go to the listowner, Eric Ray, at ejray -at- ionet -dot- net -dot-

Previous by Author: Re: Fonts and other arguable issues
Next by Author: A-Link/Shg Work-Around
Previous by Thread: Re: Frame Deficiencies
Next by Thread: Re: Frame Deficiencies

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

Sponsored Ads