I hesitate to wade into the fray, but in defense of the FrameMaker engineers, I have to say that they have incorporated a lot of user requests into recent versions. I (gasp!) really like FM11 (I use unstructured), and the improvements and new features in RH 10 are wonderful too. The FM marker and cross-reference pods (or panels or whatever they're called), which are new-ish features, are great and work well. Other "little" features like drag-and-drop text and on-the-fly spelling check and have increased my productivity. I would not want to return to FM8, no way. Now the subscription-only idea, I can't stand that, and hope it does not come to the TCS. Like another poster, I use lots of other Adobe production software like Premiere Pro, Encore, etc. and I will NOT pay monthly fees for their use. I have CS6 and I won't be upgrading. If monthly fees for the latest stuff work for some people or corporations, fine - but give us the choice if it is not how we want to do business. Alexandra
> Message: 5 > Date: Thu, 16 May 2013 08:11:47 -0700 > From: Robert Lauriston <robert at lauriston.com> > To: Maxwell Hoffmann <mhoffman at adobe.com>, > framers at lists.frameusers.com > Subject: Re: OT: Corporate madness - Adobe software to be subscription > only > Message-ID: > <CAN3Yy4DDAf=Z1XT8d0uW1nrBus1sBzsDrDknY+69weLOU=B4BQ@ > mail.gmail.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 > > How about you doing some reading and making a to-do list of the basic > features that FrameMaker users have been requesting for years? > > An easy way to find out what many of those are is to look at the > plug-ins that people are willing to pay for. How are book-level > variables, real templates, and external stylesheets still not part of > the base product? Why, despite the extensive UI changes in FM9, do we > still have tiny fixed-sized list boxes from the 1980s?
