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: Need Help with QuarkXPress From:Romay Jean Sitze <rositze -at- NMSU -dot- EDU> Date:Wed, 3 May 1995 14:29:41 -0600
> In-Reply-To: Need Help with QuarkXPress, From: "Dave L. Meek's Use
> In my opinion, QuarkXpress is a graphic artist's desktop publishing tool,
> and not suitable for routinely producing documents - even documents with
> multiple graphics. Quark's major advantage is the ability to automatically
> resize column widths to fit a specific area. Of course, your DTP tasks will
> be the determining factors. - George
Last year PC Magazine listed Pagemaker, FrameMaker, and QuarkXPress as
the top three DTP programs. They ran a comparison chart showing the
various features. I don't seem to have that issue any longer, but from
what I remember, Pagemaker was the most versatile overall, but was less
satisfactory for very long documents. FrameMaker was less versatile, but
showed a superior ability to handle long documents. QuarkXPress was
described as being possible superior to FrameMaker in handling long
documents, but is much more difficult to learn.
I have worked extensively with Pagemaker and FrameMaker, but have never
had the opportunity to work with Quark, so cannot speak from
experience. My impression is that FrameMaker is more commonly used in
technical writing departments.
