In reading some recent additions to this thread, I'm reminded that InDesign is probably unsuited for creating help systems.
On Tue, Jun 26, 2018 at 12:34 PM, Ken Poshedly <[email protected]> wrote: > Hey Pete, > > I can only wish that my company was open-minded enough to allow us to > upgrade what we have and even use different tools if so required. > > Great explanation from you. > > -- Ken in Atlanta > > > ------------------------------ > *From:* Peter Gold <[email protected]> > *To:* Ken Poshedly <[email protected]>; An email list for people > using Adobe FrameMaker software. <[email protected]> > *Sent:* Tuesday, June 26, 2018 12:34 PM > *Subject:* Re: [Framers] Final note about Adobe Licensing > > Hi, Ken: > > Thanks for the brief trip through memory lane. > > As to InDesign as a replacement for FrameMaker for technical publications, > IMO one major obstacle to this is that designers, who are its target > audience, are predominantly *not* technical-content authors. The > FrameMaker community of users over the years are mostly technical writers > who create original content; they also apply these skills to shape the > content originated by subject-matter experts across the spectrum of > technical and scientific professions, and submitted to them, into usable > technical information. In other words, they're language experts, teachers, > trainers, instructors, testers, information organizers, fact-checkers, > editors and clarifiers, of information, and also technical-document > publishers. FM has been the right tool to enable individuals to do both of > these complex sets of tasks simultaneously. > > It's not that InDesign isn't a good replacement. Since version CS 4, its > book and related text-control tools compared well to FM's. But, it's just > as difficult to get InDesign users to learn, create, and consistently use > paragraph and character text styles (AKA FM "formats",) as it has been > historically with Word, WordPerfect, FM, and others. In fact, InDesign has > named styles for tables, objects, frames (containers), variables, page > layouts, and so on. > > But the foundational difference in the user base is that FrameMaker users > have been primarily content developers and InDesign users have been > primarily content presenters. Different skill sets, different intents. The > foundational difference in the use of the tools, I believe, is that > FrameMaker document sets are often created with the expectation that there > will be future revisions, which informs their design, structure, methods, > and organization. InDesign document sets are more often seen as one-time > productions. So, there's a cultural difference about ongoing maintenance > and revision, more due to the mindsets of the users, than to requirements > of the tools. It is possible to progress from FrameMaker to InDesign as a > corporate technical-documentation publishing system, but it shouldn't > become mandatory because FrameMaker was intentionally killed off. > > Progress is always slow and fast, depending on the pain and cost > associated with it. Years ago, in the InDesign community users complained > that their print provider demanded they submit material in specific > non-InDesign formats, such as a certain level of PostScript, QuarkXpress, > PDF or NOT PDF, etc. "It's too expensive to update our time-honored > workflows and equipment. List members said, "Tell your providers that there > are other providers who welcome your preferred output and they are hungry > for business." One year, my wife and I each received our laminated and > perforated new annual wallet health-plan ID cards on letter-size pages. The > lamination covered the full page - card and huge blank area - front and > back. I suggested to the membership director that I received other cards > whose laminations only covered the card area, not the full page, and, with > rising health-care costs, asking the vendor to change could save more than > a few bucks. "They say their equipment can't do that." "Say other vendors > would love your business." The next renewals came laminated only over the > card areas. He said they saved bunches of money. Of course, my rates stayed > the same.<G> > > As has been noted more than a few times, even the cost of simply upgrading > FM to the next release isn't trivial. Changing from one major tool to > another, converting legacy content, retraining, etc., are beyond trivial. > Staying with a proven workflow has lots of value. Nothing wrong with this > model…EXCEPT WHEN THE VENDOR INVALIDATES PREVIOUSLY PURCHASED LICENSES! > That's bad faith on a corporate level. Unacceptable. > > My 2 cents. > > > > On Tue, Jun 26, 2018 at 7:36 AM, Ken Poshedly <[email protected]> > wrote: > > I may be a little off-topic, but here goes anyway . . . I've been using > FrameMaker since 1998 when my company got version 5.5.6 and, as the saying > goes, "I never looked back". We had been using WordPerfect for Windows > (version 7?) and I personally found it "clunky" to work with, especially in > doing two-column layouts (text on left with one-column graphics on the > right; yes, it can be done, but it was never as easy as with FM). While the > rest of the tech pubs world is now up to FM2017, my current employer won't > upgrade past FM 11.0 (due to the "I-know-it-all" attitude of the guy who > makes decisions about my group; another story for another day). > > Anyway . . . I recall in the early 2000's the fairly numerous posts that > Adobe (which had purchased Frame Technology Corp.), was not really > interested in upgrading it, but had gotten what it wanted (money from new > sales and a huge fan-base) and was really trying to slowly let it "die on > the vine" because Adobe really wanted to sell that fan-base on Adobe's own > homegrown product, InDesign. There was always a periodic hue-and-cry about > this and Adobe did wind up issuing updates over the years (although many > still say the last good, solid version was FM 7.0). Adobe did actually drop > the Macintoch version of FM. > Some folks compare Adobe tech support with "customer service" by Comcast > (the cable TV company). Solely based in India and sort of nonexistant and > super-deficient even if/when can get someone on the phone line. > > So, nothing is forever and Adobe will someday probably deep-six FM for no > good reason (just like NBC just cancelled the great TV show "Timeless", > resulting in a HUGE online backlash about that. Lower-than-desired ratings > don't seem to matter for other shows that still remain, however.). > > I'm old enough to remember when competitors compared their "word > processing software" to WordStar by MicroPro. I loved that program and all > its keyboard shortcuts (oh, wait a minute, that's all we had because > mouse-pointers hadn't yet made the scene). Though it has a rockier history > than FM, it is still used, but just barely. There's a great write-up about > it on Wikipedia. (The FM Wikipedia write-up is not nearly as extensive.) > And let's not forget the late, great Ventura Publisher which was > distributed by Xerox but is owned by Corel since 1993 and is a mere shadow > of its once glorious self before the Corel purchase. > > I wonder how Corel supports Corel Ventura (still available but supposedly > last updated in 2002). > > > > From: "Harding, Dan" <[email protected]> > To: An email list for people using Adobe FrameMaker software. < > [email protected]> > Sent: Tuesday, June 26, 2018 7:20 AM > Subject: Re: [Framers] Final note about Adobe Licensing > > Program software, yes. Customer support and licensing, no. > > At times it feels like FrameMaker is "abandonware", at least with respect > to the attitudes coming from within Adobe... a begrudged necessary evil > that no one there really wants the hassles of dealing with, hoping that it > will just die and go away. > > -Dan > > -----Original Message----- > From: Framers <framers-bounces+dharding=illi [email protected] > <[email protected]>> On Behalf Of Shmuel Wolfson > Sent: Tuesday, June 26, 2018 3:55 AM > To: Peter Gold <[email protected]>; Framers - frameusers.com < > [email protected]> > Subject: Re: [Framers] Final note about Adobe Licensing > > Why does everyone feel that Adobe is abandoning FrameMaker? In the latest > version they redid the menus and added a shortcut to finding menu items. > They also claim to have fixed some long-standing bugs. > > My only gripe is the high price for upgrades. But they do seem to be > working on the program. > > -- > Shmuel Wolfson > Technical Writer > 058-763-7133 > > > On 26-Jun-18 3:25 AM, Peter Gold wrote: > > These recent threads about licensing and related Adobe corporate-level > > failings, and the associated sense of abandonment that's been voiced > > by long-long-long-time FrameMaker users who represent a community of > > talented technical authors and publishers prompt me to think "Is there > > any next step that Adobe might take?" Well, if anyone at Adobe with > > any power to communicate with the higher Adobe Powers That Be reads > > this list (or if any members have contacts with folks who have the > > ability to communicate with those APTBs,) how about floating the idea > > that if Adobe's no longer interested in supporting FM and its > > community of users, perhaps it's time to think about finding a company > > that would like to buy it. FM might be only a mere fragment of a niche > > in Adobe's spectrum of products and services and income streams, but > > to a smaller enterprise, it could be a substantial business. > > > > Just another wild idea. Anyone out there? Bueller? > > ______________________________ _________________ > > > > This message is from the Framers mailing list > > > > Send messages to [email protected] Visit the list's > > homepage at http://www.frameusers.com Archives located at > > http://www.mail-archive.com/ framers%40lists.frameusers. com/ > <http://www.mail-archive.com/framers%40lists.frameusers.com/> > > Subscribe and unsubscribe at > > http://lists.frameusers.com/ listinfo.cgi/framers- frameusers.com > <http://lists.frameusers.com/listinfo.cgi/framers-frameusers.com> > > Send administrative questions to [email protected] > > > > ______________________________ _________________ > > This message is from the Framers mailing list > > Send messages to [email protected] Visit the list's homepage > at http://www.frameusers.com Archives located at http://www.mail-archive.com/ > framers%40lists.frameusers. com/ > <http://www.mail-archive.com/framers%40lists.frameusers.com/> > Subscribe and unsubscribe at http://lists.frameusers.com/ > listinfo.cgi/framers- frameusers.com > <http://lists.frameusers.com/listinfo.cgi/framers-frameusers.com> > Send administrative questions to [email protected] > ______________________________ _________________ > > This message is from the Framers mailing list > > Send messages to [email protected] > Visit the list's homepage at http://www.frameusers.com > Archives located at http://www.mail-archive.com/ > framers%40lists.frameusers. com/ > <http://www.mail-archive.com/framers%40lists.frameusers.com/> > Subscribe and unsubscribe at http://lists.frameusers.com/ > listinfo.cgi/framers- frameusers.com > <http://lists.frameusers.com/listinfo.cgi/framers-frameusers.com> > Send administrative questions to [email protected] > > > > ______________________________ _________________ > > This message is from the Framers mailing list > > Send messages to [email protected] > Visit the list's homepage at http://www.frameusers.com > Archives located at http://www.mail-archive.com/ > framers%40lists.frameusers. com/ > <http://www.mail-archive.com/framers%40lists.frameusers.com/> > Subscribe and unsubscribe at http://lists.frameusers.com/ > listinfo.cgi/framers- frameusers.com > <http://lists.frameusers.com/listinfo.cgi/framers-frameusers.com> > Send administrative questions to [email protected] > > > > > _______________________________________________ This message is from the Framers mailing list Send messages to [email protected] Visit the list's homepage at http://www.frameusers.com Archives located at http://www.mail-archive.com/framers%40lists.frameusers.com/ Subscribe and unsubscribe at http://lists.frameusers.com/listinfo.cgi/framers-frameusers.com Send administrative questions to [email protected]
