In the 1990s I used Epic at Thomson Corporation, a publisher, and I
currently use it at UGS Corp., a manufacturing software company. You
are correct when you say that Epic is better for major corporations.
The cost per seat is much higher than Framemaker and even slight
changes to DTD, CMS, or output systems within such corporations
usually result in correcting XML code several times a year, at least
in my experience. I wish we were using Frame, even though that
wouldn't solve this problem. Although many writers who previously only
used Word (ugh) but can't stand Epic are complaining at UGS, the
company won't go to Frame because of the large number of projects and
global writing groups here. It looks like they're leaning toward
XMetal Pro as an editor.
I interviewed at ArborText in Ann Arbor, MI, some time ago and it's a
bizarre company. The Epic UI hasn't changed since the beginning and
often results in typos because it is essentially non-WYSIWYG. While
XML is supposed to separate coding and writing, Epic does the
opposite. I'm comfortable with it because I've used it for so long,
but many writers write in a text editor and then paste into Epic and
format it as a second step, or refuse to use it altogether.
______________________________________________________________
From: Steve Rickaby <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: Diane Gaskill <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
[email protected]
Subject: Re: Frame vs Arbortext
Date: Thu, 26 Apr 2007 09:17:56 +0100
>At 20:17 -0400 25/4/07, Diane Gaskill wrote:
>
> >Hello Frameratti,
>
>I like that... but shouldn't it be 'Framerati'? You might be
thinking of 'Frameretti', i.e. little Framers ;-)
>
> >Remember the old days when we had debates and comparisons
between the dreaded Word and Frame? Well, now it seems that the
new competitor is Arbortext. I had my manager convinced to switch
from Word to FM, even got the ok to build the templates (done),
when along comes a VP in one of our offshore offices who thinks
using Arbortext is better and convinces my manager to have us look
at it too.
>
>I know only what I have read on this list, although it's a subject
I keep an eye on. My suggestion would be to carefully calculate
total cost of ownership of both options. From what I've heard,
almost everything is a mega-cost-plus option in Arbortext. Someone
who'd set up their own system at their own expenses a couple of
years ago was posting here, and I got the impression that although
you can get up and running with Epic at around the same cost as
FrameMaker, just to *print* anything, for example, was a few
thousand dollars more.
>
>These tools seem to be priced for major corporates, not for single
writers or small authoring teams.
>
>--
>Steve
>_______________________________________________
>
>
>You are currently subscribed to Framers as [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>Send list messages to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>To unsubscribe send a blank email to
>[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>or visit
http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/spolloc1%40hotm
ail.com
>
>Send administrative questions to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Visit
>http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info.
_______________________________________________
You are currently subscribed to Framers as [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Send list messages to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To unsubscribe send a blank email to
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
or visit
http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/archive%40mail-archive.com
Send administrative questions to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Visit
http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info.
