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: Framemaker vs. Pagemaker From:danny <djyoung -at- CTS -dot- COM> Date:Tue, 17 Nov 1998 09:49:10 -0800
>
>This isn't a "Why Framemaker over Pagemaker?" question as much as it is a
>"why do *TechWriters* prefer Framemaker while Marketing and design folks
>prefer Quark and Pagemaker?" question.
>
The answer to your question is that choosing a program isn't a preference.
I big part of a "technical communicators" job is to pick the right program
for the project. The following is probably a generalization.. but I see
Quark as mainly for newspaper and magazine layouts
PageMaker as mainly for brochures and newsletters
FrameMaker for longer technical documents, especially ones that tend to
"blowup" Microsoft Word
Of course a skilled "computer user" can make any computer program do amazing
things, but it important to keep applications perspective and use each
program for what it is designed to do. I guess this moves into the realm of
a company managing there resources correctly. Even if that company is a
person of one.
