Hi, all. A related sidebar: Ever use FrameMaker and put the "Interleaf" in a document and then spell-check it in FrameMaker?
Try it! :) Z Karen L. Zorn wrote: > Cost. Last I heard Interleaf was thousands per seat, while FM is much, much > less. > > Karen L. Zorn > Zorn Technologies, Inc. > Mesa, AZ > > > -----Original Message----- > From: framers-bounces+k.zorn=zorntech.com at lists.frameusers.com > [mailto:framers-bounces+k.zorn=zorntech.com at lists.frameusers.com] On Behalf > Of Sims, Joseph > Sent: Wednesday, January 18, 2006 2:21 PM > To: framers at lists.frameusers.com > Subject: Frame vs. Quicksilver - Please help me save Frame > > > The company I work for uses Frame, Interleaf and Word in three separate > offices. (PC version) Management has requested that we create a uniform > style for documentation starting now. They're expecting us to share content > and presumably document templates. In my opinion, all of us should use > Frame, but the Interleaf users have dug in their heels. It's become a > non-constructive us vs. them conflict. As a result, I need to come up with a > list of business reasons why Interleaf is not the correct choice for the > company. > > I know of several from prior discussions on the list, but need more. > > 1. IL to PDF conversions can be less straightforward than Frame to PDF > conversions. Does IL generate bookmarks? 2. Translation memory tools don't > support IL, dramatically increasing costs. > > 3. Interleaf/Quicksilver/Broadvision corp. is far more likely to end up in > Chapter 11 than Adobe. > 4. Frame is more widely used and offers greater compatibility with the rest > of the publishing world. > > Does anyone have any additional words of wisdom? Particularly ones that can > have costs assigned to them? > > Thanks, > Joe > > D. Joseph Sims > Technical Documentation > The Gleason Works > 1000 University Ave. > Rochester, NY 14692-2970