Re: Software

Subject: Re: Software
From: Stephen Arrants <arrants -at- BRIGHTWARE -dot- COM>
Date: Tue, 24 Dec 1996 10:03:20 -0800

The learning curve for Framemaker is quite steep (and I've sometimes
fallen off of it!). But (and I *HATE* to say this) Framemaker is so
powerful that I couldn't go back to Word for "longish" documents.

steve, who was one of the folks who wrote the manuals for the first two
releases of W4W...


>----------
>From: Bruce Foster[SMTP:bruce_foster -at- MENTORG -dot- COM]
>Sent: Tuesday, December 24, 1996 9:46 AM
>To: TECHWR-L -at- LISTSERV -dot- OKSTATE -dot- EDU
>Subject: Re: Software

>I second Mitch's recommendation for FrameMaker. I've spent many hours trying
>to get Word to do page layout that would take seconds in FM. I've also used
>PageMaker, but it has no integrated tables or equations, and it's not much
>help
>for maintaining paragraph numbering, among other things.

>- Bruce Foster

>On Dec 24, 11:30am, Mitch Berg wrote:
>> Subject: Re: Software
>> Didn't we just finish the DTP war two weeks ago?
>>
>> Jay Dougherty wrote:
>> >
>> > I'd appreciate any opinions. What's the best Windows (95) software for
>> > producing long technical documents with lots of footnotes, equations, and
>> > tables?
>>
>> In my humble but considered opinion, there are three options:
>> 1. FrameMaker
>> 2. FrameMaker
>> 3. FrameMaker
>>
>> (Don't flame me, Interleaf zealots - since he's on W95, he probably
>> can't run ILeaf anyway)
>>
>> You can produce the dox you want in many other platforms, but...
>> * in Word, you have to do so many clunky workarounds that maintenance is
>> a nightmare. If you want to have running headings that change with
>> each
>> chapter, for example, getting the "Section Breaks" to behave is enough
>> to
>> drive you to drink, esp. if multiple writers are involved.
>> Equations?
>> Don't make me laugh.
>> * PageMaker and Quark are designed for shorter, graphically-flashy
>> products.
>> I had a manager who swore by PageMaker for long dox - even after I
>> laid out a
>> 150-page manual in Frame in two hours, which took her two days in
>> PageMaker.
>> And again, if Equations are a showstopper, Frame does it, PM (AFAIK)
>> doesn't.
>> * WordPerfect? I'm told it's better than Word. I'm also told it gives
>> you
>> a fatal disease. Why bother - Frame works better.
>> * WordPro is a neat WP for short dox. You'll die a horrible, screaming
>> death if you
>> have to go over fifty pages or so. Don't go there.
>> * MS Publisher? Stop it, you're killing me...
>>
>> Frame has a learning curve, and you have to DESIGN your templates,
>> especially with an eye toward reusability - cranking out templates on
>> the fly will not do. But it pays major dividends in the long run,
>> especially if you adopt it with an aim toward standardizing your entire
>> doc set. It takes a little time and money up front, which you'll more
>> than recoup later.
>>
>> Email me if you have questions. (BTW, I'm not a paid spokesman for
>> AdobeFrameInc).
>>
>> Mitch Berg
>>
>>-- End of excerpt from Mitch Berg




Previous by Author: Re: Ebonic Plague
Next by Author: Re: Humor/Tech Support
Previous by Thread: Re: Software
Next by Thread: Re: Software


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

Sponsored Ads


Sponsored Ads