Re: FrameMaker VS PageMaker VS Quark - Opinions?

["Eric L. Dunn" <edunn -at- TRANSPORT -dot- BOMBARDIER -dot- COM>]

>>>>6. Is there anything that makes one or another a
>>"must have" for a technical writer?<<

>>Microsoft Word, because it is a basic input program.  Beyond
>>that, it would depend on the needs of the job and the people
>>who receive your work.  Usually big docs (over 1000 pages, say)
>>or that which regularly changes formatting (last year it used Times
10/14,
>>now the new look is Optima 12/14 with Madrone headings) would do best in
>>FrameMaker.  Most others would be more fun in PM and Quark.

After using Frame I don't touch word unless backed into a corner. I've seen
Word start to choke with 50 page documents.
Besides as far a usability is concerned, Frame is ahead by miles. Paragraph
formats are paragraph formats, not a conglomeration of different selections
hidden in the most unusual places. While Frame has it's limitations, work
arounds have been simple so far.
While PM and Quark may be fun, I think the labour intensiveness of page
layout for "living" documents would very quickly become a chore. Yet for
pure layout jobs (one offs, brochures, catalogues, etc..) I would want one
of these programs.

 From ??? -at- ??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000=