Re: Publishing Tool Djihad

[Bob Morrisette <robert -dot- morrisette -at- EBAY -dot- SUN -dot- COM>]

> From midannen -at- SI -dot- BOSCH -dot- DE Fri Dec  6 01:24:22 1996
> Mime-Version: 1.0
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
> X-Charset: ISO_8859-1
> X-Char-Esc: 29
> Date:         Fri, 6 Dec 1996 10:18:56 +0100
> From: "M. Dannenberg" <midannen -at- SI -dot- BOSCH -dot- DE>
> Subject:      Publishing Tool Djihad
> To: TECHWR-L -at- LISTSERV -dot- OKSTATE -dot- EDU

> Unfortunately there is no one tool that will solve all problems. I
> introduced Frame in this company about a year ago and everybody agrees
> it's the only way to go for long complex documents. Management of course
> doesn't like the thought of having to support two programs, i.e Word and
> Frame, but there's just no other way. Frame is just as useless for short
> docs, like memos or letters, as Word is for long ones.

> In my experience, everybody who's spent a couple of days grappling with
> Word on a long document welcomes the switch to Frame and appreciates its
> reliability and robustness. Switching is relatively painless because I
> provide the templates, so people don't have to worry about formatting.
> Working with two systems is a pain, but until Frame sorts out its user
> interface, or Word gets a life, I don't see an alternative.


> Mike Dannenberg
> midannen -at- si -dot- bosch -dot- de
> ETAS GmbH & Co.KG

Why is FrameMaker "useless for short docs, like memos or letters?"
Unless you need Word output for a client, there is no reason to support
both Frame and Word. Since I started using Frame, I've never had a reason
to use Word. My documents range from one to several hundred pages.
Creating a one pager takes the same time with either tool.

Bob Morrisette
writer -at- sabu -dot- EBay -dot- sun -dot- com