atw: Re: Framemaker - A Few Random Observations
- From: James Hunt <jameshunt@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: austechwriter@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Tue, 14 Feb 2006 20:58:57 +1000
If you believe the reports that circulate on such places as the
FrameMaker Forum, FM for Windows is probably still being developed
and upgraded at Adobe's Indian research and development site. It's
unlikely to ever return for the mac, but the Windows version looks
like it might have a fair bit of life left yet. Whether there will
ever be any real reworking of the original code is a moot point
though.
Incidentally, apart from its robustness and ability to handle multi-
file documents, it's still touted by many as the best option for
long documents, particularly those requiring custom indexes, cross-
refs, conditional text etc.
Depends what you mean by "developed and upgraded", or "best option".
FM has hardly changed for years, and to many eyes looks quite clunky.
Adobe could well decide to stop even the current low level of
development, and allow the product to fade away.
FM is the "best option" only in comparison to Word, whose bugs are
well known. There are products that out-perform FM by a wide margin:
for example, the Arbortext series of products, useful for very long
books (like the 10,000 page one I am revising with Arbortext at the
moment...).
Arbortext even produces better-looking printed output than FM. The
output from FM is outstandingly ugly.
Adobe may have little financial incentive to develop FM: how many
technical writers are there in the world, and how much software do
they buy? I suspect that we are only a tiny fraction of the market
for, say, InDesign.
Adobe also owns RoboHelp (through the Macromedia subsidiary).
RoboHelp is a sunset product, and the laid-off development team set
up their own company (http://www.madcapsoftware.com/) and offer their
own product. (Has anyone tried it?)
Adobe would have had even less financial incentive to keep going with
RH: how many technical writers write help systems? What is this
market worth?
No software product lasts forever, especially if it is not
particularly profitable for its owner. We should be planning for a
future without FrameMaker and without RoboHelp.
JH
**************************************************
To post a message to austechwriter, send the message to
austechwriter@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To subscribe to austechwriter, send a message to austechwriter-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with
"subscribe" in the Subject field.
To unsubscribe, send a message to austechwriter-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with
"unsubscribe" in the Subject field.
To search the austechwriter archives, go to
www.freelists.org/archives/austechwriter
To contact the list administrator, send a message to
austechwriter-admins@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
**************************************************
- Follow-Ups:
- atw: Re: Framemaker - A Few Random Observations
- From: Peter G Martin
- References:
- atw: Framemaker
- From: gkw
Other related posts:
- » atw: Re: Framemaker - A Few Random Observations
- » atw: Re: Framemaker - A Few Random Observations
- » atw: Re: Framemaker - A Few Random Observations
- » atw: Re: Framemaker - A Few Random Observations
- » atw: Re: Framemaker - A Few Random Observations
Incidentally, apart from its robustness and ability to handle multi- file documents, it's still touted by many as the best option for long documents, particularly those requiring custom indexes, cross- refs, conditional text etc.
- atw: Re: Framemaker - A Few Random Observations
- From: Peter G Martin
- atw: Framemaker
- From: gkw