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: FrameMaker vs. QuarkXPress From:Donald Le Vie <dlevie -at- VLINE -dot- NET> Date:Tue, 29 Jun 1999 11:04:40 -0500
I've used FrameMaker for many years and, after using just about every other
document preparation package available, believe it's the best around. Check
out the Adobe web site at
http:www.adobe.com/supportservice/custsupport/NOTES for some comparisons of
FrameMaker vs. other packages. I'm not sure if they compare QuarkXpress, but
it's been my experience that Quark competed more with PageMaker as more of a
document layout package (great for marcom brochures and documents with a
lower page count) than a comprehensive document development system like
Frame. I've managed developing user and reference manuals up to 1100 pages
in Frame and I couldn't imagine doing it in Quark!
Hope this helps,
Donn Le Vie
Director, Information Development
Integrated Concepts, Inc.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Dorothy Parnian [SMTP:dparnian -at- SKILLSBANK -dot- COM]
> Sent: Tuesday, June 29, 1999 10:57 AM
> To: TECHWR-L -at- LISTSERV -dot- OKSTATE -dot- EDU
> Subject: FrameMaker vs. QuarkXPress
> I'm being "gently persuaded" to switch from FrameMaker to QuarkXPress.
> I've used
> FrameMaker for years, but I've only just begun to use Quark. I like it,
> but find
> it a bit clunky. I need a good evaluation before our next big production
> Which one do you prefer and why? I really want to hear from intermediate
> of both products.
> Thanks in advance.
> From ??? -at- ??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000=