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 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 http://www.okvotech.org/cimc/