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.
> The cavalier way in which Adobe has been abandoning support for Unix
> platforms without advance warning is unconscionable. Versioin 6.0, the
> first major release in 4 years, was a vast disappointment. It is almost
> certainly the final release before Adobe puts FrameMaker into maintenance
> mode where it will be left to die. After all, the FrameMaker code is
> already more than 12 years old, and I'm sure much of it is
> spaghetti by now.
>
> The real question, then, is whether it is possible to sustain the
> viability
> of FrameMaker /FM+SGML (and thus maintain most of the installed
> base) for a
> number of years after Adobe abandons it.
I don't know if any software company is willing to give up the money
involved with updates. Especially with such a popular product like Frame.
Adobe will probably continue to update FrameMaker with minor changes (i.e.,
absorbing third-party plug-in functionality) until they figure out a new
hook into Adobe or Frame-related products. The 5.x releases were all hooks
into Adobe or plug-in related features. The 6.x release is a hook into Web
publisher, plus their new book format. The 7.x release (a few years from
now) will be a hook into something else, no doubt.
> It might even be possible for the Frame user community to develop what
> amounts to functional specs for such enhancement products, and literally
> put them out for bid to third-party developers. If a respondent
> stated that
> he'd be willing to produce the product at a price of X dollars if
> he could
> get firm advance commitments for X number of licenses, it might
> be possible
> to set up a process for accomplishing all of this.
I am all in favor of creating a set of functional specs for plug-ins.
I have been looking at the Frame API in order to determine how hard it would
be to create the tools to do the jobs that I need. Creating a Frame Plug-in
Spec Forum would be a real bonus for any plug-in developer.
Creating plug-ins also lets Adobe know that their job is not yet done. As
long as an active third party plug-in community exists, Adobe should
recognize that the Frame feature set is still lacking.
Walden Miller
Director, Vidiom Systems
Boulder, Colorado
