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: Migrating from Word 97 to FrameMaker 5.5 (and back); Macs and PC's
Subject:Re: Migrating from Word 97 to FrameMaker 5.5 (and back); Macs and PC's From:"M. Dannenberg" <midannen -at- SI -dot- BOSCH -dot- DE> Date:Wed, 3 Sep 1997 09:49:43 +0200
Harrison Brace schrieb:
> As have had so many problems with Word 97, I have suggested that the
> company buy one license for FrameMaker, which I alone would use. I am
> hoping that it will not be much of a problem for me to convert my
> documents
> to Word 97 format when others want to use them. Anyone have any
> experience
> working with both Word 97 and FrameMaker? Does this introduce more
> problems
> than it solves?
If your documents are at all complex, converting to Frame and back
repeatedly will be a major pain. Generally, any kind of mixed
environment will introduce some problems. I've introduced Frame in this
company, and got quite a lot of flak for it initially, because everybody
thought having two word-processors does not make sense, and it certainly
does cause some extra hassles. Once people used Frame for large
documents, however, they saw the light and now they would never want to
go back.
You should probably think about getting Frame for everybody who works on
large documents, they'll thank you in the long run. Alternatively, if
people only have to read your documents, just give them PDFs.
> Also, I'd like to replace my antiquated PC with a Mac--in spite of all
> the
> problems Apple is now having. I've seen many studies indicating that
> mixing
> Macs and PC's is no more expensive to support than a PC-only
> environment,
> and that "content creators" are on average $23,000 more productive per
> year
> using a Mac. (Well, we all know how dubious these statistics can be,
> but I
> think there is something to this.) It may be a difficult case to make,
>
> however, giving Apple's current PR problems.
I think that's a really bad idea. Any kind of productivity gain you
might get from a Mac - and I think those $23000 are VERY dubious - will
be eaten up by your having to support yourself, unless of course your
company will hire support staff for just a single Mac. Now, they'll tell
you a Mac does not need any support, cause it's sooo easy to use, but I
dont' buy that. Hey, by the way, I don't want to get into the PC/Mac
jihad thing, I'm just saying that introducing a single Mac into a PC
environment is asking for trouble.
Mike
--
Mike Dannenberg
ETAS GmbH & Co.KG
midannen -at- si -dot- bosch -dot- de
TECHWR-L (Technical Communication) List Information: To send a message
to 2500+ readers, e-mail to TECHWR-L -at- LISTSERV -dot- OKSTATE -dot- EDU -dot- Send commands
to LISTSERV -at- LISTSERV -dot- OKSTATE -dot- EDU (e.g. HELP or SIGNOFF TECHWR-L).
Search the archives at http://www.documentation.com/ or search and
browse the archives at http://listserv.okstate.edu/archives/techwr-l.html
