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. Pagemaker vs Word From:"Mark L. Levinson" <markl -at- gilian -dot- com> To:TechWr-L <TECHWR-L -at- LISTS -dot- RAYCOMM -dot- COM> Date:Thu, 23 Mar 2000 12:54:31 +0200
Tim Altom writes:
Word is inherently clumsy, inefficient, and breakable,
** Inherently clumsy? Inefficient? Try using FrameMaker
to deal with a document where the number of columns changes
from time to time. No, clumsy & inefficient depend on what
you're trying to do. Work long enough with any of these
tools, and you adapt your thinking to it so that
its capabilities seem vital and its incapacities
seem irrelevant. You even stop seeing the
waste space that FrameMaker insists on displaying
at the top and bottom of the page.
Breakable is another matter. FrameMaker seems to
be getting stabler while Word is getting less so,
and as the years pass, it begins to seem as if
nobody at Microsoft knows how to fix Word...
------------------------------------------------------------
Mark L. Levinson - markl -at- gilian -dot- com - Herzlia, Israel
------------------------------------------------------------
