2FHGKINGLY@kuhub.cc.ukans.edu (10/07/89)
When using Frame 1.0 (from NeXT release 1.0), can you not type two consecutive spaces when typing text. When I'm typing text, tabs don't work and after the first space character, pressing the space bar has no effect. I realize that Frame 1.0 is a beta (or alpha?) demo, but this makes it unusable... comments...
jans@tekgvs.LABS.TEK.COM (Jan Steinman) (10/13/89)
<When using Frame 1.0 (from NeXT release 1.0), can you not type two consecutive spaces when typing text. When I'm typing text, tabs don't work and after the first space character, pressing the space bar has no effect.> If it is similar to Frame on Tek workstations, you must set up your tabs the way you want them in order to fix the amount of space between columns or whatever. When you think of it, what are the semantics of multiple spaces in a WYSIWYG doc-prep system? Depending on justification, alignment, kerning, hyphenation threshold, page keeps, et. al., there can be any amount of space between words! IMHO, they got it right -- only allow explicitly declared whitespace, and disallow archaic reliance on "space" as some kind of "character", which it really isn't. The semantics of the space bar in WYSIWYG doc-prep should be "begin a new word". If you actually need to place more than one consecutive ASCII space character in a file, Frame is probably an inappropriate tool. Jan Steinman - N7JDB Electronic Systems Laboratory Box 500, MS 50-370, Beaverton, OR 97077 (w)503/627-5881 (h)503/657-7703
yyang@frame.com (Yeong Yang) (10/13/89)
>When using Frame 1.0 (from NeXT release 1.0), can you not type two consecutive >spaces when typing text. You have the "smart spaces" option turned on in the Format-Document dialog. >When I'm typing text, tabs don't work and after the >first space character, pressing the space bar has no effect. You have to set the tab stops for your paragraph format. You can set the tab stops by using the format-paragraph dialog or by simply dragging a tab stop off the text ruler. > I realize that >Frame 1.0 is a beta (or alpha?) demo, but this makes it unusable... >comments... The FrameMaker app in 1.0 release is a very decent beta demo copy and has many powerful features. Though one minor (:-)) feature -- saving will be disabled on Oct 17, 1989. The actual FrameMaker product will be on sale at BusinessLand by then. Yeong C. Yang
epsilon@wet.UUCP (Eric P. Scott) (10/16/89)
In article <3592@frame.UUCP> yyang@frame.com (Yeong Yang) writes: >The FrameMaker app in 1.0 release is a very decent beta demo copy and has many >powerful features. Though one minor (:-)) feature -- saving will be >disabled on Oct 17, 1989. Too bad. The chances we'll have 1.0 available for general use before then are about zero. Without a full demo, we'll be less inclined to get addicted to it, and thus less likely to site-license it for our organization of 35,000 people. We're totally scrupulous about licensing software, and this is audited and verified, and we generally commit to software decisions for no less than five years. Five years guaranteed revenue. Five years of convincing everyone that comes through to demand YOUR product wherever they go when they leave. Five years of word-of- mouth advertising--the best kind--the kind you just can't buy. >The actual FrameMaker product will be on sale at BusinessLand by then. According to the documentation, educational institutions deal with Frame directly, not B-Land. That's ok, you don't need our money, or us persuading our 10-times-the-size parent University to adopt your product statewide. Too bad, it looked kinda neat. Now, if there were some license number that extended the full functionality to say, Dec. 31, you might get a full audition rather than a listing under "reclaimable disk space." -=EPS=- / SFSU standard disclaimer -- just tellin' it like it is
langz@asylum.SF.CA.US (Lang Zerner) (10/17/89)
In article <679@wet.UUCP> epsilon@wet.UUCP (Eric P. Scott) writes: >In article <3592@frame.UUCP> yyang@frame.com (Yeong Yang) writes: >>The FrameMaker app in 1.0 release is a very decent beta demo copy and has >>many powerful features. Though one minor (:-)) feature -- saving will be >>disabled on Oct 17, 1989. > >Too bad. The chances we'll have 1.0 available for general use >before then are about zero. Without a full demo, we'll be less >inclined to get addicted to it, and thus less likely to >site-license it Actually, I had access to a crippled demo (freely redistributable, natch) of FrameMaker, and got addicted to it very nicely, thank you. Of course, it wasn't useful for large documents or ongoing projects, but for a one-day project like a letter, poster, flyer or short newsletter, it worked just fine. Not only is printing still available, but you can print to a PostScript file and therefore have an online archive of your final version. After that, though, you can make only minor changes such as spelling corrections (by hacking the PostScript file), so a real save feature comes in real handy. The crippled demo is subtlely seductive ("it's free -- why not get what use of it you can"). In the end, my manager started using it, got hooked, got frustrated with the limited online storage facilities of `Print to File' and so bought a license. Note that I'm not taking exception to your assertion that the full-featured version is superior to the crippled one, just to the other one that you won't be able to generate addiction to FrameMaker without a full save feature. And, of course, I wouldn't be saying any of this if I had any relationship to Frame Corporation other than as a user. I don't. -- Be seeing you... --Lang Zerner langz@asylum.sf.ca.us UUCP:bionet!asylum!langz ARPA:langz@athena.mit.edu "...and every morning we had to go and LICK the road clean with our TONGUES!"
dubman@monsoon.Berkeley.EDU (Jonathan Dubman) (10/17/89)
In article <679@wet.UUCP> epsilon@wet.UUCP (Eric P. Scott) writes: >In article <3592@frame.UUCP> yyang@frame.com (Yeong Yang) writes: >>The FrameMaker app in 1.0 release is a very decent beta demo copy and has many >>powerful features. Though one minor (:-)) feature -- saving will be >>disabled on Oct 17, 1989. > >Too bad. The chances we'll have 1.0 available for general use >before then are about zero. Without a full demo, we'll be less >inclined to get addicted to it, and thus less likely to >site-license it for our organization of 35,000 people... ... (more stuff to make to make company sales reps cry) I don't know what organization that is but if it is really of that magnitude and really needs publishing software, I am SURE that Frame would be happy to grant you a temporary license and provide instruction and support- just give them a call. They didn't get where they are today by sealing their product in a box and selling it to Egghead. They live by corporate accounts, and I know they would be accomodating. They would be silly not to give you what you want, and you'd be silly not to ask. They're even right here in the bay area. I have no association with Frame, but thanks to their demo I've had a chance to try out their neat product. Jonathan Dubman
epsilon@wet.UUCP (Eric P. Scott) (10/19/89)
In article <1989Oct17.084225.6063@agate.berkeley.edu> dubman@monsoon.Berkeley.EDU (Jonathan Dubman) writes: >In article <679@wet.UUCP> epsilon@wet.UUCP (Eric P. Scott) writes: >>In article <3592@frame.UUCP> yyang@frame.com (Yeong Yang) writes: >>> Though one minor (:-)) feature -- saving will be >>>disabled on Oct 17, 1989. >>Too bad. The chances we'll have 1.0 available for general use >>before then are about zero. Correction--absolutely zero. After the 'quake we are still 100% shut down. >I don't know what organization that is but if it is really of that magnitude ^^^^^^^^^ interesting choice of word >and really needs publishing software, I am SURE that Frame would be happy to >grant you a temporary license How about a special earthquake extension? > They're even right here in the bay area. Then they're probably not answering their phones either. -=EPS=-
chavez@sumex-aim.stanford.edu (R. Martin Chavez) (10/19/89)
For what it's worth: I got addicted to Frame, I love it, and couldn't live without it. I called Frame, found Kelly Mattson (408.954.3974), and sent her a $500 check for my educational license. She was incredibly helpful; she gave me an authorization/serial number to keep my current copy of Frame active, and even planned to deliver the new 2.0 copy on optical disk to my house in San Francisco yesterday. The earthquake changed all that, of course, but I still can't complain a bit about Frame's quality product, and the company's flexibility in a pinch really deserves my commendation. Regards, R. Martin Chavez Stanford University School of Medicine
glc@frame.UUCP (Greg Cockroft) (10/20/89)
>>and really needs publishing software, I am SURE that Frame would be happy to >>grant you a temporary license >How about a special earthquake extension? > >> They're even right here in the bay area. >Then they're probably not answering their phones either. The phones weren't being answered, but shipping was in operation, so the first copies of the NeXT FrameMaker release 2.0 shipped yesterday. You will also notice the demo version on the 1.0 disk is still working past the 17th. It won't really disable until the 23rd. The NeXT machines must have some type of power surge shutdown. The sun on my desk didn't stop, but all the NeXT machines in the building shutdown when the quake hit. -greg.
rogerj@batcomputer.tn.cornell.edu (Roger Jagoda) (10/20/89)
In article <7650@asylum.SF.CA.US> langz@asylum.UUCP (Lang Zerner) writes: > >Actually, I had access to a crippled demo (freely redistributable, natch) of >FrameMaker, and got addicted to it very nicely, thank you. Of course, it >wasn't useful for large documents or ongoing projects, but for a one-day >project like a letter, poster, flyer or short newsletter, it worked just fine. >Not only is printing still available, but you can print to a PostScript file >and therefore have an online archive of your final version. After that, >though, you can make only minor changes such as spelling corrections (by >hacking the PostScript file), so a real save feature comes in real handy. > >The crippled demo is subtlely seductive ("it's free -- why not get what use of >it you can"). In the end, my manager started using it, got hooked, got >frustrated with the limited online storage facilities of `Print to File' and so >bought a license. All right, I'll look into it. Now, where do you "buy" this product. I've tried NeXT and they don't sell it? Who did you contact at Frame? Or did you go via BusinessLand? How much was the lisence and what did it cover? Please, tell all? Roger Jagoda Cornell University FQOJ@CORNELLA.CIT.CORNELL.EDU (607) 255-8960
dcarpent@sjuphil.uucp (D. Carpenter) (10/21/89)
In article <5259@lindy.Stanford.EDU> chavez@sumex-aim.stanford.edu (R. Martin Chavez) writes: >For what it's worth: I got addicted to Frame, I love it, and couldn't >live without it. I called Frame, found Kelly Mattson (408.954.3974), >and sent her a $500 check for my educational license. Is this right? Only $500 for the educational price? If thiss is correct, then where do I send my money? I had thought that the price would be about double this. I'm an the faculty of a university and own a NeXT, which I bought at the educational price, so I assume (rightly?) that I would be entitled to the educational price for Framemaker. Can anyone confirm this price, and provide details on how to obtain 2.0? Another question. I heard some time back that Frame intended to support SGML in a future release of Framemaker. Could anyone supply details on this? -- =============================================================== David Carpenter dcarpent@sjuvax.UUCP St. Joseph's University dcarpent%sjuvax.sju.edu@relay.cs.net Philadelphia, PA 19131 ST_JOSEPH@HVRFORD.BITNET
chavez@sumex-aim.stanford.edu (R. Martin Chavez) (10/21/89)
In article <1989Oct21.011645.1787@sjuphil.uucp> dcarpent@sjuphil.UUCP (D. Carpenter) writes: >>For what it's worth: I got addicted to Frame, I love it, and couldn't >>live without it. I called Frame, found Kelly Mattson (408.954.3974), >>and sent her a $500 check for my educational license. > >Is this right? Only $500 for the educational price? If thiss is >correct, then where do I send my money? I had thought that the >price would be about double this. I'm an the faculty of a university >and own a NeXT, which I bought at the educational price, so I assume >(rightly?) that I would be entitled to the educational price for >Framemaker. Can anyone confirm this price, and provide details on >how to obtain 2.0? It turns out that I'm the very first person to take delivery on FrameMaker 2.0. As I suggested, you simply need to call Kelly Mattson at 408.954.3974, and send your check for $500 to: Frame Technology Corporation attn: Kelly Mattson 1010 Rincon Circle San Jose, California 95131-1325 The price includes the optical disk, which comes packed with all sorts of special treats. The 2.0 release has several improvements over the demo version (including on-line help and a much snazzier equation editor). FrameMaker is a sophisticated, elegant, and robust product; I recommend it very highly, and consider the $500 educational price to be a real bargain. R. Martin Chavez Stanford University School of Medicine
epsilon@wet.UUCP (Eric P. Scott) (10/23/89)
In article <3597@frame.UUCP> glc@frame.com (Greg Cockroft) writes: >You will also notice the demo version on the 1.0 disk is still working past >the 17th. It won't really disable until the 23rd. When students are finally let back on campus... :-( Other than "losing" the Library and a 700-student residence hall, things should be back to normal on the 23rd. Only one cube (that I know of) was trapped in the Library; that floor is rumored to have suffered minor structural damage. Unfortunately the floor above was undergoing asbestos removal (oops), so the upper five floors won't be accessible for a while... We plan to have 1.0 up in November, since the people that are to install the prerequisite ROMs will be very busy doing "important" things in the aftermath. Right now, FrameMaker is the least of our worries. -=EPS=- / SFSU