Help Authoring Tools Summary (LONG - Part 1)

["Marilyn Baldwin (mlbb -at- capgroup -dot- com)" <Marilyn_Baldwin -at- CAPGROUP -dot- COM>]

A short time ago, I asked TECHWR-L the following:

   A question to my peers: what experiences (good and bad) can you
   share/advice can you give about help authoring tools?  We are looking at
   Doc-to-Help, RoboHelp, and ForeHelp (with some slight leaning toward the
   latter).  We've read the research on ComputerSelect and elsewhere, but -
   before we consider buying and training - it would be wonderful to hear
   your "been there, done that" stories.  You may answer on- or off-list.
   If others think it's worthwhile, I'll publish a summary of your
   comments.  Thanks!  - Marilyn Baldwin (mlbb -at- capgroup -dot- com)

Here are the answers I received (with recommended products in alpha order).
Sincere thanks to those who responded.  As always, when you help one person
on this list, you are helping many!

   A while back I responded to a similar request with a comparison of tools
     that I've used in various jobs. Perhaps this will be helpful to you:
     Some thoughts on distributing manuals:
   Currently I am using Doc-to-Help Documentation studio to create single
     source documents that are used both as manuals, and online help. It
     makes life very complicated to use this approach because you must do
     intense planning up front as far as layout, content, links, what is
     "manual only" what is "help only," audience targets and use
     assumptions. The tools were determined before I started here a year
     ago. D2H because it runs on Word, looks like word, and except for
     advanced features, behaves much like Word. That meant they could
     generate documents using staff not trained in technical writing and
     publishing tools.
   In previous opportunities, I have used a variety of tools:  Here is some
     discussion on pros and cons:
   Corel Ventura:
    Cons
     ?    Ventura is miserable to learn if you have no previous publishing
      software experience.
     ?    Not user friendly, lots of bogus code (from previous owners of
      the software that are now being cleaned by Corel).
     ?    Poor quality user's guides, inaccurate indexing, not completely
      task or process oriented. Relies on sophisticated user (experienced
      desktop publisher and unafraid of "frontiers." Gee, we've never done
      that before)
     ?    Out of date help. My experience was with 6.0 and the Help had not
      been updated from 5.0 in some areas where bugs were identified for
      several years.
     ?    Technical support not qualified to answer phones on most
      occasions. Seriously, no one could answer my questions.
     ?    Memory hog. Recommended 16, needs 24, runs best with 32 meg ram.
      Not tolerant of multitasking. Won't play nice with other memory hogs
      (like Word).
     ?    Tables cause problems. Still.
     Pros:
     ?    Many plug ins to powerful tools - Corel suite of applications.
     ?    Ability to cross reference across books (yes plural - books).
      Truly useful when you deal with complex documentation manuals that
      must cross-reference each other accurately.
     ?    Can create common index across books.
     ?    Many formatting options and tools. You create your style once and
      can use it in all chapters instead of recreating or attaching it for
      each chapter (Vs FrameMaker).
     ?    Converts to EPS and other electronic print formats.
     ?    Best for huge, several hundred paged documents (egads, people
      actually do create documents in hundreds of pages)
   FrameMaker (my experience was with 5.0)
    Cons
     ?    Cannot cross reference across multiple books.
     ?    No plug ins, although compatible with most file formats.
     ?    Capacity problems with huge documents.
     Pros
     ?    Is a complete word processor on it's own. No need to have Word or
      other processing tool. FrameMaker can do it.
     ?    Good documentation.
     ?    User friendly GUI, no black holes or "user intuitive" features
      AKA "take your best guess what this really does."
     ?    Easily adaptable to intranet delivery, goes into Adobe easy.
     ?    Can be e-mailed without crashing server. File size is smaller
      than Ventura's pub.
     ?    Can separate and reattach chapters with ease.
     ?    Can save as RTF and preserve formatting.
     ?    Slick little application about 400 cheaper than Ventura.
   Word
    Con
     ?    This is a word processor. It is not a desk top publishing tool
      although it becomes more robust with each rendition.
     ?    Memory/resource pig.
     ?    Bad graphic handling (fixed in Word 97 - but not backward
      compatible with previous versions).
     ?    Made by Microsoft.
     ?    Susceptible to prank virus types.
     ?    Limited cross referencing, clumsy indexing.
     ?    Horrid documentation. Really. They could do better but they rely
      on the third party industry to make sense of their application and
      poor documentation.
     ?    Version problems (backwards compatibility issues, options issues,
      won't work with any of your other tools if you have Word 97.
     ?    No compression options.
     ?    Frequently released with bugs (not features) that are then fixed
      in a fix disk that you have to ask extra nice for. And have your
      credit card handy if you really want the fix.
    Pros
     ?    Comes on darn near every computer.
     ?    You can share templates (like virus types) to standardize
      formatting.
     ?    Works with lots of tools for import/export. That whole Office
      idea.
     ?    Made by Microsoft (Yes, both pro and con).
     ?    Has descent free support and excellent paid solution support. Ah,
      America, if money is involved, we can find an answer...
     ?    Easy to convert to HTML, Help, SGML, etc. Is the base of lots of
      other applications.
     ?    e-mails easy, and because most folks have it, can be read by
      everyone. (if it's not Word 97).
     ?    Can be converted for use in any other publishing tool.
     ?    Sets the standards for word processing software, and drives many
      publishing tools (all trying to catch up to Word 97).
     ?    Lots of 3rd party literature.
     ?    Lots of education opportunities (people train it everywhere)
     ?    Has translation capacities.
   Doc-To-Help
    Cons
     ?    Documentation should be better - it's their business after all.
     ?    Help out of date. I frequently find errors and have to call to
      get the finally steps to the task, or figure out what the task steps
      truly are. (such as mid topic jumps).
     ?    Advanced features not user friendly/intuitive.
     ?    Memory pig. Fights with Word for resources. Will crash on out of
      memory errors, needs special maintenance to optimize drive
      performance for compiles.
     ?    Sits on top of Word. Draw your own conclusions.
     ?    Single source tool - but the world is not ready for this.
     ?    Expensive. Site licenses are ridiculous.
     ?    Does not run well over network. They are honest and tell you that
      up front.
     ?    Cumbersome compile process.
     ?    Templates sit in Word, weak defense to virus types.
     ?    Awkward indexing. Uses word.
     ?    Files get corrupted for no apparent reason.
     ?    Hard to keep .doc file on network without accompanying d2h .ini
      file to let others without D2H installed read the document.
     ?    No "read only" feature for network copies of manual. The Revision
      tool overwrites and strikes out page numbers and everything else even
      if you just open a read-only, password protected, file marked read
      only in File Manager or Explorer, document.
     ?    Multi step conversion process to help or HTML.
     ?    Relies on Win Help Workshop for troubleshooting problems in
      compile process.
     ?    Requires sophisticated planning to get a good looking hardcopy
      and online document that is also usable and size conscious.
   Pros
     ?    Company has excellent Web site.(online presence)
     ?    Good technical support, better paid support.(telephones)
     ?    Offers list server for users to write in with questions,
      monitored by excellent staff who supply PROMPT answers. Thank
      goodness.
     ?    Knowledge base on web documenting known problems and solutions.
     ?    Update/fix disks for timely solutions.
     ?    Converts to HTML and help easy.
     ?    Automated processes for compile.
     ?    Ability to use single source.
     ?    industry leader. They did it first, they are still the best.
     ?    file compression
     ?    lots of add ins (documentation studio)
     ?    ability to create multi-media HTML and Help
     ?    Has solution for Word 95 bad graphics handling ability(Quicture,
      smooth scaling).
     ?    Lets you mark text as manual only, help only, or both.
     ?    Automatic xref. update fields.
     ?    Good interface with Word.
     ?    Friendly folks on the digest answering questions.
   Pagemaker
     I have also used Pagemaker (many years ago). My impression was that it
     was not as robust as FrameMaker but good for the 25-100 page document
     we produced using it.
   Word Perfect
     This is even more of a word processor only tool than Word. More
     limitations, fewer features, but still acceptable as source document
     for many publishing tools. It has been added to Lotus Suite so it will
     soon become a hybrid like Word.
   Microsoft Publisher
     This takes Word to the true status of desktop publisher. I have only
     run a demo on it, not examined it closely. It has some GUI problems,
     the documentation is still weak (typical of all Microsoft products),
     but the 3rd party  literature is good and readily available. Also
     acceptable through Kinko's network so you can send your documents to
     Kinko's anywhere to be printed...
   Authorware
     We are looking into doing computer-based training (CBT)  development
     and self directed paper-based training manuals. Authorware is a big
     name in this publishing venue allowing for development of CBT as well
     as desktop publishing features for paper materials. My experience is
     limited to a demo. But all vendors have recommended it as a tool for
     the CBT development and some few have recommended it for both CBT and
     paper.
   My advice. Consider the future of your documentation.
     Will it need to be delivered from the Web, Intranet, Lan\Wan?
     What is the format of the deliverable? Are you going to go to online
        documentation with the option of letting the user print their own
        copy of the manual from the help?
     Is your tool going to be updated in the future to meet the multi-media
        challenge (it seems inevitable from my perspective)? Will it
        continue to be supported and have tie ins to other applications?
     What are your resources? Budget plays a part here too. Can you afford
        to deliver via Web solutions, etc...
   Good Luck with your quest for information.
                    - Martha Cowley