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: Frame and macros From:Tom Johnson <tjohnson -at- GRANDTRAVERSE -dot- COM> Date:Thu, 4 Sep 1997 07:52:46 -0400
Bruce Byfield wrote:
> I suspect, though, that we're going to see a lot more Word-like features
> in FrameMaker over the next couple of releases. Adobe is positioning
> Frame directly against Word in the documentation market, so that's
> probably inevitable.
> Bruce Byfield, Outlaw Communications
I hope not. The last thing we need is another case of bloatware. I agree
Frame lacks some features that would be really useful, but we can do
without the animated help characters and the like. If Adobe can target
Frame toward the computer-adept market and not the neophytes, we will
all be better off in the long run.
As technical writers, most of us probably have enough computer
experience to know how to learn new software. As a group, I'd say
technical writers are pretty good at figuring things out which makes a
lot of "features" not really that beneficial. A lot of the stuff I see
in Word (Wizards, animated helpers) tends to get in my way when I do my
work. I find Frame to be a workhorse and Word is like a show horse with
lots of shiny tack. If you have a heavy load to pull, choose the
I'm not trying to start a Frame versus Word war, just saying that I hope
Frame doesn't become so much like Word that it loses its muscle.