tallis@starbase.mitre.com (Hans Tallis) (02/22/91)
Our department (45 people, a dozen SunView/X boxes) is contemplating purchasing a desktop publishing system. Currently we run a lot of Word on Macs and little TeX on Unix(tm). Publisher and Framemaker seem to be the two front runners for our next step. I'm very new to this technology, so if you could send me any brief wisdom you have on the subject I'd be quite grateful. If there's interest, I'll post a summary. Thanks, --Hans tallis@ai.mitre.org
jwi@cbnewsj.att.com (Jim Winer @ AT&T, Middletown, NJ) (02/23/91)
If you are professional writers, you won't like either Framemaker or Publisher. They are very easy to use for a novice, you just follow the menus. If you do something else for a living, this is ideal. If you write for a living, you will find that you have to follow the menus every time -- there are no shortcuts. It will drive you batty. You will also find that the integrated art is for amateurs too. If you are used to doing good art on your Macs, plan on driving your artists up a wall. In general, Framemaker and Publisher are good for projects where documentation is an afterthought. They are not compatible with people who write or draw for a living, but they are very good for engineers and supervisiors. Jim Winer -- jwi@mtfme.att.com -- Opinions not represent employer. ------------------------------------------------------------------ "No, no: the purpose of language is to cast spells on other people ..." Lisa S Chabot
briand@tekig5.PEN.TEK.COM (Brian D Diehm) (02/23/91)
In article <1991Feb22.213956.10496@cbnewsj.att.com> jwi@cbnewsj.att.com (Jim Winer @ AT&T, Middletown, NJ) writes:
]If you are professional writers, you won't like either Framemaker or Publisher.
]They are very easy to use for a novice, you just follow the menus. If you
]do something else for a living, this is ideal. If you write for a living,
]you will find that you have to follow the menus every time -- there are
]no shortcuts. It will drive you batty.
]You will also find that the integrated art is for amateurs too. If you are
]used to doing good art on your Macs, plan on driving your artists up a wall.
]In general, Framemaker and Publisher are good for projects where documentation
]is an afterthought. They are not compatible with people who write or draw for
]a living, but they are very good for engineers and supervisiors.
***********************************************************************
* *
* This is, without a doubt, THE most ridiculous assertion I have EVER *
* read on the net. And I used to subscribe to groups on politics. *
* *
* *
* Sheesh. *
* *
***********************************************************************
--
-Brian Diehm
Tektronix, Inc. (503) 627-3437 briand@tekig5.PEN.TEK.COM
P.O. Box 500, M/S 47-780
Beaverton, OR 97077 (SDA - Standard Disclaimers Apply)pfkeb@ebnextk.SLAC.Stanford.EDU (Paul Kunz) (02/23/91)
In article <1430@tekig7.MAP.TEK.COM> briand@tekig5.PEN.TEK.COM (Brian D Diehm) writes: Path: unixhub!linac!pacific.mps.ohio-state.edu!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!wuarchive!mit-eddie!uw-beaver!zephyr.ens.tek.com!tekig7!tekig5!briand From: briand@tekig5.PEN.TEK.COM (Brian D Diehm) Newsgroups: comp.text.desktop Date: 22 Feb 91 22:31:49 GMT References: <1991Feb21.220957.23332@linus.mitre.org> <1991Feb22.213956.10496@cbnewsj.att.com> Sender: news@tekig7.MAP.TEK.COM Reply-To: briand@tekig5.PEN.TEK.COM (Brian D Diehm) Distribution: usa Organization: Tektronix, Inc., Beaverton, OR. Lines: 30 In article <1991Feb22.213956.10496@cbnewsj.att.com> jwi@cbnewsj.att.com (Jim Winer @ AT&T, Middletown, NJ) writes: ]If you are professional writers, you won't like either Framemaker or Publisher. ]They are very easy to use for a novice, you just follow the menus. If you ]do something else for a living, this is ideal. If you write for a living, ]you will find that you have to follow the menus every time -- there are ]no shortcuts. It will drive you batty. ]You will also find that the integrated art is for amateurs too. If you are ]used to doing good art on your Macs, plan on driving your artists up a wall. ]In general, Framemaker and Publisher are good for projects where documentation ]is an afterthought. They are not compatible with people who write or draw for ]a living, but they are very good for engineers and supervisiors. *********************************************************************** * * * This is, without a doubt, THE most ridiculous assertion I have EVER * * read on the net. And I used to subscribe to groups on politics. * * * * * * Sheesh. * * * *********************************************************************** -- -Brian Diehm Tektronix, Inc. (503) 627-3437 briand@tekig5.PEN.TEK.COM P.O. Box 500, M/S 47-780 Beaverton, OR 97077 (SDA - Standard Disclaimers Apply) I agree.
lark@greylock.osf.org (Lar Kaufman) (02/26/91)
In article <1991Feb25.160352.14488@cbnewsj.att.com>, jwi@cbnewsj.att.com (Jim Winer @ AT&T, Middletown, NJ) writes: > | I wrote: > | |If you are professional writers, you won't like either Framemaker or Publisher. This is obviously untrue. I am a professional writer with 12 years of experience. I like FrameMaker, and, if properly used, I like Ventura Publisher. > | |They are very easy to use for a novice, you just follow the menus. If you > | |do something else for a living, this is ideal. If you write for a living, > | |you will find that you have to follow the menus every time -- there are > | |no shortcuts. It will drive you batty. This is also untrue. You do not have to follow menus in FrameMaker. There are emacs-type keybindings for many functions, and also a macro language that you can use to automate procedures. If you don't think this is powerful or "manly" enough, you can save your FrameMaker and Publisher files as ASCII files and edit them directly... That is how I normally work with Ventura Publisher. > | |You will also find that the integrated art is for amateurs too. If you are > | |used to doing good art on your Macs, plan on driving your artists up a wall. Oh, I get it. The M-word. FrameMaker has an excellent drawing package. If you find it inadequate for your needs, you can supplement it with Island Graphic's paint program. Ventura does have limited graphics support, but it supports enough graphics formats to allow you to use powerful third-party tools for preparing artwork. > | |In general, Framemaker and Publisher are good for projects where documentation > | |is an afterthought. They are not compatible with people who write or draw for > | |a living, but they are very good for engineers and supervisiors. Ventura Publisher is adequate for many publishing needs. FrameMaker is, in point of fact, superior to most packages available for engineers, as its equation formatting is better than any other available - save that you can fine-tweak TeX output more. Very few supervisors need sophisticated formatting, except for creating foils (projection displays). In this regard, Ventura and FrameMaker are both rather mediocre, as their table-formatting capabilities are limited. (Don't expect them to stay that way.) > | Brian Diehm wrote: > | * This is, without a doubt, THE most ridiculous assertion I have EVER * > | * read on the net. And I used to subscribe to groups on politics * This is probably a modest exaggeration. > Gee, Brian, you must be one of those engineers. Sorry that your milage varies, > but that's the way that Framemaker and Publisher are. -- nice for supervisors > and engineers and stinky for writers and artists. It's basically the IBM > problem of trying to be everything for everybody and as a result being > mediocre at everything. But the perhaps you think mediocre is wondeful. Jim, I think your comments are easily discounted in this newsgroup. This is a largely professional publishing audience you are exposing yourself to, not a bunch of Mac fans. BTW, are you aware that FrameMaker is available for the Mac? Perhaps you could try it. > Incidently, I think that it's rather ridiculous to complain about > another post without indicating what you object to -- sort of makes you > sound like you don't know what you're talking about so you make noise > instead. Try being more specific -- then somebody can pick you apart instead > of just thinking you're silly. True. The only reasonable statement you have made. I don't normally jump in like this, but your statements deserve picking apart. > Jim Winer -- jwi@mtfme.att.com -- Opinions not represent employer. > ------------------------------------------------------------------ Lar Kaufman I would feel more optimistic about a bright future (voice) 512-794-9070 for man if he spent less time proving that he can (fax) 512-794-0623 outwit Nature and more time tasting her sweetness lark@tivoli.com and respecting her seniority. - E.B. White