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:FrameMaker versus Interleaf From:Michael Uhl <uhl -at- VISLAB -dot- EPA -dot- GOV> Date:Fri, 23 Jun 1995 10:05:19 -0400
I currently use FrameMaker 4 for UNIX. I like it.
I have used these programs in great depth as a professional
technical communicator:
FrameMaker 4 (UNIX)
Interleaf 1,2, 3... (UNIX)
PageMaker 4.2 (Macintosh)
PageMaker 5 (Windows)
Ventura Publisher 1.0 (DOS)
MS Word for Windows 6.0c
Each has had desirable features that a competitor has not. I haven't
used Interleaf in about 3 years. I used to teach people how to use
Interleaf and I loved it. Interleaf has a better drawing capability
than FrameMaker and it's pop-up menus are far superior to FrameMaker.
I like the way you can display the style names (they're not called
"styles" though; I think Interleaf calls them "components") in Interleaf,
just as you can in Word, in a column along the left edge of the Window.
Interleaf has an excellent indexing capability.
Word for Windows, on the other hand, offers many speed formatting features
that FrameMaker and Interleaf do not. Word offers WordBasic, which is an
easy-to-learn-and-use programming language. Word also allows you to easily
assign keystrokes to styles.
I could go on and on... The point is, that no matter which program you
choose, someone can make a case why you should have purchased something
different. FrameMaker is a very good document publishing program, and
so is Interleaf. It's a matter of marketing: Frame has its act together
and Interleaf slipped badly. Interleaf had the top end publishing market
cornered but then let Frame move in. (Remember some of the old XEROX
products for high end publishing?)
Choose the program you can defend the best when management or peers
criticize your choice...seems like someone always does.
-Mike
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Michael Andrew Uhl Internet: uhl -at- vislab -dot- epa -dot- gov
Lead Technical Writer Compuserve: 72624,2155
Scientific Visualization Center (SVC) & Phone: (919) 541-4283 [W]
National Environmental Fax: (919) 361-9464 [H]
Supercomputing Center (NESC) ftp site: ftp.nesc.epa.gov
EPA/Martin Marietta Technical Services Inc.
79 Alexander Drive MD 24/4201-2
Research Triangle Park, NC 27709
************************************************************************
