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.
Re: RoboHelp For FrameMaker Discontinued -- Please Help Us Save It
Subject:Re: RoboHelp For FrameMaker Discontinued -- Please Help Us Save It From:"T.W. Smith" <techwordsmith -at- gmail -dot- com> To:"TECHWR-L" <techwr-l -at- lists -dot- raycomm -dot- com> Date:Wed, 18 Aug 2004 22:06:05 -0400
I tested WWP 2003 and RHFM 1.0 side-by-side on the same two projects,
one 800-page about 1200 topics and the other 1200 pages and about 1400
topics, both with many screen captures and vectors and ...
... WWP was 3 times faster than RHFM 1.0 on the same projects. Or,
RHFM 1.0 was 300% slower than WWP 2003.
As far as features go, I identified two that were advantageous in
RHFM, only two. Firstly, **if** you output more than one kind of help
for a specific project, RHFM makes this easier than WWP, where it is a
pain. I say **if** because I never do this. I create only one kind of
help for any given project. If the project needs to run in three
different environments, I go with a cross-platform, cross-browser kind
of help rather than creating three different help projects for the
same project. Secondly, RHFM does a better job with breadcrumbs, it
adds them to the GUI, whereas to do breadcrumbs in WWP 2003 you need
to follow the directions in a knowledgebase article.
So, that being said, I'd need to know more about your assertions
regarding RHFM being "unrivalled" by and superior to WWP 2003.
Brand loyalty is a great thing, but those of you who found RHFM to be
revolutionary (it was a good version-one produit) should reflect on
the thought that you could have had a similar advantage for 8 years
already, by using WWP ... and brand loyalty might have kept you from
those savings for all those years (how much cash, time, and personnel
did that burn down?).
Otherwise, RHFM will continue to work for you until at least the
arrival of Longhorn, and I believe the X5 cross-grade offer by
MacroMedia is quite generous, even if the tool doesn't fit the bill.
======
T.
Remember, this is online. Take everything with a mine of salt and a grin.
ROBOHELP X5: Featuring Word 2003 support, Content Management, Multi-Author
support, PDF and XML support and much more!
TRY IT TODAY at http://www.macromedia.com/go/techwrl
WEBWORKS FINALDRAFT: New! Document review system for Word and FrameMaker
authors. Automatic browser-based drafts with unlimited reviewers. Full
online discussions -- no Web server needed! http://www.webworks.com/techwr-l
---
You are currently subscribed to techwr-l as:
archiver -at- techwr-l -dot- com
To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-techwr-l-obscured -at- lists -dot- raycomm -dot- com
Send administrative questions to ejray -at- raycomm -dot- com -dot- Visit http://www.raycomm.com/techwhirl/ for more resources and info.
