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: Any Word on Word? From:Bruce Ashley <bashley -at- CREATEPRINT -dot- COM -dot- AU> Date:Fri, 16 Oct 1998 13:38:17 +1000
I disagree Drew,
Word has always claimed the role and with modern hardware (Windows 95+ and
Pentium 150+) it is quite OK.
Up until 6 months ago, I used Word6, then 97 and my document were up to 250
pages in length with at least 1 embedded image for every 1 to 2 pages and
these were CAD, flowcharts, graphs, screen captures and a heap of
demonstrative images from a range of sources. Sure, I had the odd hiccough,
but I also do now with Frame.
With Word 6, Windows 3.11 and a 486DX4100, I tended to have trouble over
about 60 pages. When the hardware was updated, 99% of the problems fell
away.
I now use FrameMaker 5.5 and experience few difficulties. I do, however,
miss my Word graphic features.
Regards,
Bruce Ashley
OZ
Drew Krause wrote:
My personal word on Word is that, with such large graphics-intensive
documents, you're asking for trouble: the software simply wasn't designed
to handle it.
