Re: Framemaker vs. Pagemaker

Subject: Re: Framemaker vs. Pagemaker
From: Tracy Boyington <tracy_boyington -at- OKVOTECH -dot- ORG>
Date: Tue, 17 Nov 1998 11:58:04 -0600

> This isn't a "Why Framemaker over Pagemaker?" question as much as it is a
> "why do *TechWriters* prefer Framemaker while Marketing and design folks
> prefer Quark and Pagemaker?" question.

Don't know about PageMaker, but we use Quark XPress and it's just not
meant to do the things we're trying to do. XPress is good for small,
graphic-intensive projects (flyers, brochures) but it does not handle
long documents well (i.e., books with hundreds of pages) and lacks basic
features that even Word provides, such as automatic TOC generation and
the ability to create or import tables. Yes, that's right -- you can't
even draw a table in Quark XPress (at least not in versions 3.x) without
buying an expensive, poorly-designed "extension."

Not that I'm bitter... :-)
Tracy Boyington mailto:tracy_boyington -at- okvotech -dot- org
Oklahoma Dept. of Vocational & Technical Education
Curriculum & Instructional Materials Center
Stillwater, Oklahoma

From ??? -at- ??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000=

Previous by Author: Re: Copyrights
Next by Author: Re: How Times Have Not Changed
Previous by Thread: Re: Framemaker vs. Pagemaker
Next by Thread: Re: Framemaker vs. Pagemaker

What this post helpful? Share it with friends and colleagues:

Sponsored Ads