mark@hermesa.uucp (Mark McWiggins) (06/20/91)
My company is evaluating high-end publishing packages. So far we have a demo of Frame (which looks great) and the Interleaf rep salivating over us; haven't seen his package yet. Have you been through this? Which did you pick and why? Are there other contenders that we should consider? Thanks in advance for any insight. -- Mark McWiggins mark@hermesa.uucp ...uw-beaver!amc-gw!hermesa!mark Box 40357, Bellevue WA 98004 / +1 206 455 2786 (24 hrs.)
steve@rastaban.anu.oz.au (Steven Ball) (06/21/91)
mark@hermesa.uucp (Mark McWiggins) writes: >My company is evaluating high-end publishing packages. So far we >have a demo of Frame (which looks great) and the Interleaf rep salivating >over us; haven't seen his package yet. >Have you been through this? Which did you pick and why? Are there other >contenders that we should consider? Indeed we have. We too have a demo copy of Frame. Interleaf gave a demo copy too. In fact, any site with Interleaf can give you a demo copy, you can save files and print only if you have a password. My feeling was that they are essentially leap-frogging each other feature-wise, but that Interleaf was ahead by a nose. In the end our decision came down to the bottom line - cost. Interleaf gives educational institutions a very nice deal... they practically give it away! Frame has floating licenses, and with >150 Suns that would have run into many thousands of dollars. >Thanks in advance for any insight. >-- >Mark McWiggins >mark@hermesa.uucp >...uw-beaver!amc-gw!hermesa!mark >Box 40357, Bellevue WA 98004 / +1 206 455 2786 (24 hrs.) -- Steven Ball, Department of Computer Science, ANU E-mail: steve@anucsd.anu.edu.au Ph. (06) 2495146 Snail-mail: GPO Box 4, CANBERRA CITY ACT 2600, AUSTRALIA He's not the messiah, he's a very naughty boy!
fred@compu.com (Fred Rump) (06/21/91)
mark@hermesa.uucp (Mark McWiggins) writes: >My company is evaluating high-end publishing packages. So far we >have a demo of Frame (which looks great) and the Interleaf rep salivating >over us; haven't seen his package yet. >Have you been through this? Which did you pick and why? Are there other >contenders that we should consider? To me availablility across as many platforms as possible is a key ingredient here. Performance and price are also big considerations. Having seen Frame 3.0 satisfied the performance/functionality issue. Platforms are everywhere. Price was good for the main line we need it for: SCO OpenDeskTop ($995) Since Interleaf was not available where we see the biggest market, why even bother looking. Perhaps it is simply too high end for us, but Frame seems to do everything imaginable plus some. I guess you know what the conclusion was, right? Fred PS We don't have 3.0 yet on the SCO platform - another couple weeks they say. [Maybe August? :-)] -- Fred Rump | 'A little learning is a dangerous thing/Drink deep CompuData, Inc. | or taste not the Pierian spring' Alexander Pope 10501 Drummond Rd. | SCO Advanced Product Center Philadelphia, Pa. 19154| Internet: fred@COMPU.COM (215-824-3000)
pa1@tdatirv.UUCP (Pat Alvarado) (06/26/91)
mark@hermesa.uucp (Mark McWiggins) writes: >My company is evaluating high-end publishing packages. So far we >have a demo of Frame (which looks great) and the Interleaf rep salivating >over us; haven't seen his package yet. >Have you been through this? Which did you pick and why? Are there other >contenders that we should consider? I also have evaluated FrameMaker and Interleaf and found that Interleaf makes it very difficult to maintain. I am using a Sun 386i Workstation running SunOS 4.0.3 and SunView. My problems with Interleaf began with the swap space cost, 26MB per WS recommended by Interleaf. Printing became a factor also. First, Interleaf generates print requests as userid daemon and generates its own cover page which looks different than cover pages we use with lpr. This caused confusion when someone at the printer would be sorting the output and not recognizing the cover page would mix it up with a previous output. FrameMaker prints jobs as the real userid of the user. In addition, an adjustable shell script is available to custom control print jobs. e.g. If a job will generate a large output, send it to an appropriate printer for a large output. Interleaf generates enormous PostScript for print jobs, causing print requests to take much longer than necessary, and sometime not at all because Interleaf didn't know how to handle jobs larger than 1MB with lpr, so lpr would truncate the file. In one case, a single page in Interleaf generated 900k of PostScript. Interleaf would also take up so much memory during printing that if a moderate number of other windows were open (3-4), Interleaf might run out of memory. FrameMaker generated approximately 1/4 the PostScript code for a similar document in Interleaf. If a PostScript file did exceed 1MB, the file would be created locally and a symbolic link established using the -s option of lpr. I could have as many as 15 other windows open while using FrameMaker. In order to resolve a lot of customization, a System Admin with root password had to get involved to make simple changes. All changes were Workstation dependent, not user dependent. So provided I always worked at the same WS, which is usually the case, my WS dependent license and changes remained intact. FrameMaker allows the user to use the default system settings, or create their own in their home directory regardless of the WS. These include custom templates, lpr scripts, filter programs, window layout, keyboard shortcuts, etc... and without intervention from a Sys Admin with root privilege. Interleaf places all documents within a "desktop" ignoring the main desktop on the Workstation. This limits workspace, unless the Interleaf desktop is allowed to expand the entire screen. FrameMaker places all documents within the main desktop, unconstrained. You may move the document anywhere you wish. FrameMaker occasionally has trouble painting the window when sharing with other windows (at least with SunView), and can be corrected by the redisplay command. Hopefully this is fixed with FrameMaker 3.0. Lastly, ease of use. Interleaf has "Walking Menus" in which one must sift through several levels of menus to achieve even simple tasks, such as drawing a line, or changing an attribute in a paragraph. Some commands may be executed via keyboard, but all by mouse. FrameMaker has a single menu bar at the top of each document. Each menu generates a task or a "Dialog Box" in which you simply check off what you need, and apply. Important dialog boxes such as Paragraph attributes, character attributes, Graphics toolbox, etc ... may remain open. All commands may be executed by either keyboard or mouse, and FrameMaker will indicate the keyboard equivelant next to the menu selection. While Interleaf may have an abundance of features for creating professional publications, I found that FrameMaker's features fell within the boundaries of my needs and made it faster and more productive to create documentation. Disclaimer: My views and opinions are my own and do not represent in any way, shape or form my employer's. I have no affiliation with either Interleaf or Frame Technology other than as a customer. -- ||| Pat Alvarado | v Teradata Corporation | tdat!pa1@suntzu.sun.com /\ /\ 100 N. Sepulveda Blvd. | uunet!edsews!hacgate!tdat!pa1 /// \\\ El Segundo, Calif. 90245 | pa1@tdat.teradata.com
davecb@nexus.yorku.ca (David Collier-Brown) (06/28/91)
I'm an Interleaf bigot: I found Frame more elegant and faster to learn, but harder to do difficult things with (like *!#@$@^!!! tables) On a 2/50 (although a 3/6 is far better) I dodn't have any of the printing or space problems experienced by Pat Alvarado: I think they're port-specific to the 386 version. Mind you, I lied to lpr and told it the speed to use was 38,400... And if you want to customize Interleaf, all you have to do is get you systems admin to give you a lisp procedure in the standard ``desktop'' to allow you to select your personal version. Knowing interleaf, its probaly something like (bang-symlink-on-head-with my-desktop ordinary-desktop (;-)) --dave -- David Collier-Brown, | davecb@Nexus.YorkU.CA | lethe!dave 72 Abitibi Ave., | Willowdale, Ontario, | Today's featured dish: CANADA. 416-223-8968 | Sun-dried alligator.
peter@micromuse.co.uk (Peter Galbavy) (06/28/91)
pa1@tdatirv.UUCP (Pat Alvarado) writes: >mark@hermesa.uucp (Mark McWiggins) writes: >>My company is evaluating high-end publishing packages. So far we >>have a demo of Frame (which looks great) and the Interleaf rep salivating >>over us; haven't seen his package yet. >>Have you been through this? Which did you pick and why? Are there other >>contenders that we should consider? >I also have evaluated FrameMaker and Interleaf and found that Interleaf >makes it very difficult to maintain. I am using a Sun 386i Workstation >running SunOS 4.0.3 and SunView. My problems with Interleaf began with >the swap space cost, 26MB per WS recommended by Interleaf. I know I shouldn't but: Have you seen Avalon from Elan ? We are the UK distributor, and so this is almost advertising, but I am not the 'expert'. If you want more details contact Elan direct on: (415) 964 2200 or sales@elan.com (I think). >Disclaimer: >My views and opinions are my own and do not represent in any way, >shape or form my employer's. I have no affiliation with either Interleaf >or Frame Technology other than as a customer. ditto. -- Peter Galbavy Tech Support, Micromuse Ltd Phone: +44 71 352 7774 E-Mail: P.Galbavy@micromuse.co.uk
mark@drd.com (Mark Lawrence) (06/29/91)
In article <1991Jun28.030953.9094@newshub.ccs.yorku.ca> davecb@nexus.yorku.ca (David Collier-Brown) writes: > I'm an Interleaf bigot: I found Frame more elegant and faster to learn, but >harder to do difficult things with (like *!#@$@^!!! tables) I'm a frame bigot: Frame 3.0 (shipping now for Suns running Sunview and shortly for platforms running X) reportably handles tables with the same aplomb as paragraph formats. -- mark@drd.com mark@jnoc.go.jp $B!J%^!<%/!&%i%l%s%9!K(B Nihil novum sub solem