Re: Frame vs. Quicksilver - Please help me save Frame
Several years ago, I used Intergrief for 2 years. It had the most cumbersome GUI of any DTP application I have ever seen. It required selecting as many as 8 levels of child menus to do anything. It did have a couple of nice features, but not enough to make me ever want to use it again. In fact, given the choice between Interleaf /Quicksilver and Word, I'd choose Word. Now .that. ought to tell you something. :-) Diane (glad I don't have to choose) Gaskill === -Original Message- From: Syed Zaeem Hosain [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Jan 20, 2006 9:53 AM To: Combs, Richard [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: framers@lists.frameusers.com Subject: Re: Frame vs. Quicksilver - Please help me save Frame Hi, Richard, et. al. Combs, Richard wrote: BTW, back when I was working in Interleaf (on Sun 3/50s), we demo'd this new software called FrameMaker. My evaluation? It had a brilliant paradigm and lots of potential, but it wasn't robust and full-featured enough to replace Interleaf. Times change. Now, you couldn't drag me back to Ileaf for love or money. Wow! Bring back some interesting memories for me too! :) I first compared Interleaf and FrameMaker on Sun 3/50's in 1989. The tech pub department in the company was using Interleaf, and our engineering department was evaluating which way to go for our documentation needs. The tech pub folks were pushing us to select Interleaf for consistency. We ended up selecting FrameMaker for a few simple reasons (at the time.) FrameMaker had a server license concept (with checkout), but Interleaf was locked to the single workstation. And, when you ran Interleaf, it took over the graphics and you could not run other windowing tools (Suntools from Sun for example.) The choice was clear (although it took some convincing for the CEO - who approved all capital purchases) and we never looked back! Z ___ You are currently subscribed to Framers as [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] or visit http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/dgcaller%40earthlink.net 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] 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.
Frame vs. Quicksilver - Please help me save Frame
Several years ago, I used Intergrief for 2 years. It had the most cumbersome GUI of any DTP application I have ever seen. It required selecting as many as 8 levels of child menus to do anything. It did have a couple of nice features, but not enough to make me ever want to use it again. In fact, given the choice between Interleaf /Quicksilver and Word, I'd choose Word. Now .that. ought to tell you something. :-) Diane (glad I don't have to choose) Gaskill === -Original Message- >From: Syed Zaeem Hosain >Sent: Jan 20, 2006 9:53 AM >To: "Combs, Richard" >Cc: framers at lists.frameusers.com >Subject: Re: Frame vs. Quicksilver - Please help me save Frame > >Hi, Richard, et. al. > >Combs, Richard wrote: >> BTW, back when I was working in Interleaf (on Sun 3/50s), we demo'd this >> new software called FrameMaker. My evaluation? It had a brilliant >> paradigm and lots of potential, but it wasn't robust and full-featured >> enough to replace Interleaf. >> >> Times change. Now, you couldn't drag me back to Ileaf for love or money. > >Wow! Bring back some interesting memories for me too! :) > >I first compared Interleaf and FrameMaker on Sun 3/50's in 1989. >The tech pub department in the company was using Interleaf, and >our engineering department was evaluating which way to go for our >documentation needs. The tech pub folks were pushing us to select >Interleaf "for consistency." > >We ended up selecting FrameMaker for a few simple reasons (at the >time.) FrameMaker had a server license concept (with checkout), but >Interleaf was locked to the single workstation. And, when you ran >Interleaf, it took over the graphics and you could not run other >windowing tools (Suntools from Sun for example.) > >The choice was clear (although it took some convincing for the >CEO - who approved all capital purchases) and we never looked back! > >Z >___ > > >You are currently subscribed to Framers as dgcaller at earthlink.net. > >To unsubscribe send a blank email to >framers-unsubscribe at lists.frameusers.com >or visit >http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/dgcaller%40earthlink.net > >Send administrative questions to lisa at frameusers.com. Visit >http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info.
RE: Frame vs. Quicksilver - Please help me save Frame
Hi Paul, I just googled Quicksilver publishing software on Mac OS X. There are tons of articles, but it looks like Mac has some product they labeled Quicksilver too, which impacts the OS itself somehow. I don't think it's the former Interleaf product being discussed, but only had time to just scan a few articles. You'll have to wade through cyberland, and let us know what you find out. Although I'm harnessed to PC at work and home, I'm still interested in Mac. I learned on Mac computers ages ago while working for a community college. It's been ten years since I saw the Interleaf product and I can't remember if it was running on a Mac or PC. Rita Muller Technical Writer Morrow Technologies Corporation -Original Message- From: Paul Findon [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, January 20, 2006 4:47 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: framers@lists.frameusers.com Subject: Re: Frame vs. Quicksilver - Please help me save Frame On 19 Jan 2006, at 16:04, Rita Muller wrote: Me too, Bill! But I just Googled Interleaf and learned that Quicksilver is the new brand name for the original Interleaf code. So IL is alive and well, just now known as Quicksilver. Does it run on Mac OS X? I remember that it supports x-refs, something 69 of Adobe's 70 products can't do, and they update in real-time. No Update command required. Paul ___ You are currently subscribed to Framers as [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.
RE: Frame vs. Quicksilver - Please help me save Frame
At 7:29 am -0500 20/1/06, Rita Muller wrote: I just googled Quicksilver publishing software on Mac OS X. There are tons of articles, but it looks like Mac has some product they labeled Quicksilver too, which impacts the OS itself somehow. Yes, it does: it's a shareware command expander. Nothing at all to do with DTP. -- Steve ___ You are currently subscribed to Framers as [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.
Re: Frame vs. Quicksilver - Please help me save Frame
Hi, Richard, et. al. Combs, Richard wrote: BTW, back when I was working in Interleaf (on Sun 3/50s), we demo'd this new software called FrameMaker. My evaluation? It had a brilliant paradigm and lots of potential, but it wasn't robust and full-featured enough to replace Interleaf. Times change. Now, you couldn't drag me back to Ileaf for love or money. Wow! Bring back some interesting memories for me too! :) I first compared Interleaf and FrameMaker on Sun 3/50's in 1989. The tech pub department in the company was using Interleaf, and our engineering department was evaluating which way to go for our documentation needs. The tech pub folks were pushing us to select Interleaf for consistency. We ended up selecting FrameMaker for a few simple reasons (at the time.) FrameMaker had a server license concept (with checkout), but Interleaf was locked to the single workstation. And, when you ran Interleaf, it took over the graphics and you could not run other windowing tools (Suntools from Sun for example.) The choice was clear (although it took some convincing for the CEO - who approved all capital purchases) and we never looked back! Z ___ You are currently subscribed to Framers as [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.
Frame vs. Quicksilver - Please help me save Frame
My approach would be as follows: Solicit opinions from a IL/Quicksilver list in the same manner. Beware though as some of your colleagues may be on those lists - write from a neutral email address and don't mention too many identifying details. Sorry, I've no idea if any lists even exist, but I'd assume they do. When you present your findings: - Emphasise the cost savings of choosing Frame over IL, ease of use, knowledgebase, ease of finding new employees with those skills etc. - Describe how Frame can integrate with Word in a fairly easy workflow. Those not using Frame could use Word as a quick cheap editor for example, and then Frame is used to assemble the document for production. - Highlight a migration path from IL to Frame. If you can justify that Frame is cheaper than IL, that it works well with Word and that going from IL to Frame won't be as painful as the ILers fear, then you've got a winning argument. I know nothing about IL or Quicksilver and trying to get information out of BroadVision's website was a struggle. Compare that with the info available on the Adobe site for Frame for example. Rob
Frame vs. Quicksilver - Please help me save Frame
On 19 Jan 2006, at 16:04, Rita Muller wrote: > Me too, Bill! But I just Googled Interleaf and learned that > Quicksilver is > the new brand name for the original Interleaf code. So IL is alive and > well, > just now known as Quicksilver. Does it run on Mac OS X? I remember that it supports x-refs, something 69 of Adobe's 70 products can't do, and they update in real-time. No Update command required. Paul
Frame vs. Quicksilver - Please help me save Frame
Hi Paul, I just googled "Quicksilver publishing software on Mac OS X." There are tons of articles, but it looks like Mac has some product they labeled Quicksilver too, which impacts the OS itself somehow. I don't think it's the former Interleaf product being discussed, but only had time to just scan a few articles. You'll have to wade through cyberland, and let us know what you find out. Although I'm harnessed to PC at work and home, I'm still interested in Mac. I learned on Mac computers ages ago while working for a community college. It's been ten years since I saw the Interleaf product and I can't remember if it was running on a Mac or PC. Rita Muller Technical Writer Morrow Technologies Corporation -Original Message- From: Paul Findon [mailto:pfin...@infopage.net] Sent: Friday, January 20, 2006 4:47 AM To: rmuller at morrowcorp.com Cc: framers at lists.frameusers.com Subject: Re: Frame vs. Quicksilver - Please help me save Frame On 19 Jan 2006, at 16:04, Rita Muller wrote: > Me too, Bill! But I just Googled Interleaf and learned that > Quicksilver is > the new brand name for the original Interleaf code. So IL is alive and > well, > just now known as Quicksilver. Does it run on Mac OS X? I remember that it supports x-refs, something 69 of Adobe's 70 products can't do, and they update in real-time. No Update command required. Paul
Frame vs. Quicksilver - Please help me save Frame
At 7:29 am -0500 20/1/06, Rita Muller wrote: >I just googled "Quicksilver publishing software on Mac OS X." There are tons >of articles, but it looks like Mac has some product they labeled Quicksilver >too, which impacts the OS itself somehow. Yes, it does: it's a shareware command expander. Nothing at all to do with DTP. -- Steve
Frame vs. Quicksilver - Please help me save Frame
Rita Muller wrote: > It's been ten years since I saw the Interleaf product and I > can't remember if it was running on a Mac or PC. I'd guess it was either a PC or a Sun workstation. I last worked with Ileaf about 16 years ago, and it only ran under UNIX (Solaris, HP-UX, maybe one or two others). Shortly after, Interleaf 386 came out, and it ran -- badly, IIRC -- under Windows. If they ever ported it to the Mac, it must have been much later. And I'd be surprised. BTW, back when I was working in Interleaf (on Sun 3/50s), we demo'd this new software called FrameMaker. My evaluation? It had a brilliant paradigm and lots of potential, but it wasn't robust and full-featured enough to replace Interleaf. Times change. Now, you couldn't drag me back to Ileaf for love or money. ;-) Richard
Frame vs. Quicksilver - Please help me save Frame
Hi, Richard, et. al. Combs, Richard wrote: > BTW, back when I was working in Interleaf (on Sun 3/50s), we demo'd this > new software called FrameMaker. My evaluation? It had a brilliant > paradigm and lots of potential, but it wasn't robust and full-featured > enough to replace Interleaf. > > Times change. Now, you couldn't drag me back to Ileaf for love or money. Wow! Bring back some interesting memories for me too! :) I first compared Interleaf and FrameMaker on Sun 3/50's in 1989. The tech pub department in the company was using Interleaf, and our engineering department was evaluating which way to go for our documentation needs. The tech pub folks were pushing us to select Interleaf "for consistency." We ended up selecting FrameMaker for a few simple reasons (at the time.) FrameMaker had a server license concept (with checkout), but Interleaf was locked to the single workstation. And, when you ran Interleaf, it took over the graphics and you could not run other windowing tools (Suntools from Sun for example.) The choice was clear (although it took some convincing for the CEO - who approved all capital purchases) and we never looked back! Z
Re: Frame vs. Quicksilver - Please help me save Frame
I've only seen Quicksilver/Interleaf demo'd for me, but from what I saw, the cost of (re)training could be much greater too. I could be wrong, but I thought it made FrameMaker look simple. If most of your users are coming from Word, it could be easier, and therefore, cheaper to switch to Frame. Just from a cost viewpoint (per seat, training, etc.), why not ask the Interleaf users to justify *their* position? David Creamer I.D.E.A.S. - Results-Oriented Training http://www.IDEAStraining.com Adobe Certified (since 1995) for ALL Print and Web Publishing-related software Authorized Quark Provider (since 1988) Markzware, Enfocus, FileMaker Certified Apple Certified Consultant (since 1990) ___ You are currently subscribed to Framers as [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.
RE: Frame vs. Quicksilver - Please help me save Frame
4. Frame is more widely used and offers greater compatibility with the rest of the publishing world. Related to this is if/when the time comes that you need a contractor to do something fast, you are a lot more likely to find a Frame pro than an Interleaf one. This applies to new hires, too, if the boss is unwilling to wait for someone to come up to speed. ___ You are currently subscribed to Framers as [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.
Re: Frame vs. Quicksilver - Please help me save Frame
Joe, A few more factors to think about including in your business case... * numbers of users of each tool * approximate number of existing pages in each tool * platforms/OS in use and on which your products run And, although I haven't had contact with them for years, Adobe used to maintain some field sales support pros that got involved when some level of corporate decision- making was taking place in order to push the case. They provided demos, CBAs, integration scenarios, etc. Very useful resources; stuff you won't find from the off-the-shelf software vendords. Art On 1/18/06, Sims, Joseph [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: 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 -- Art Campbell [EMAIL PROTECTED] ... In my opinion, there's nothing in this world beats a '52 Vincent and a redheaded girl. -- Richard Thompson No disclaimers apply. DoD 358 ___ You are currently subscribed to Framers as [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.
Frame vs. Quicksilver - Please help me save Frame
I thought that IL was effectively a dead product - web Me too, Bill! But I just Googled Interleaf and learned that Quicksilver is the new brand name for the original Interleaf code. So IL is alive and well, just now known as Quicksilver. Give me FM any day over that IL/Quicksilver product. It's clunky, klugy, and weird in more ways then one, IL that is, imho. Rita Muller Technical Writer Morrow Technologies Corporation ___ You are currently subscribed to Framers as [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.
RE: Frame vs. Quicksilver - Please help me save Frame
I'd almost guarantee that for 80% of the Interleaf users, the only factor that really matters is that they don't have to change what they've been doing for the last dozen years. They've got a lot of time and energy invested on making it second nature to use a tool that most people consider arcane. They simply don't want to forced to change to *any* other tool that might involve a similar learning curve. The more difficult a tool was to learn, the more likely it is that proficient users will be strongly averse to adopting a new tool (unless they are tool geeks like me...) My opinions only; I don't speak for Intel. Fred Ridder (fred dot ridder at intel dot com) Intel Parsippany, NJ -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Glenn Voyles Sent: Thursday, January 19, 2006 4:17 PM To: framers@lists.frameusers.com Subject: RE: Frame vs. Quicksilver - Please help me save Frame We've heard a lot about how much better FM is than IL, and I don't doubt any of it. Great points. But wouldn't the IL side of the house be building a case as well? I'm curious what justification they claim for their cause. Glenn ___ You are currently subscribed to Framers as [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.
Re: Frame vs. Quicksilver - Please help me save Frame
Solicit opinions from a IL/Quicksilver list in the same manner. Beware though as some of your colleagues may be on those lists - write from a neutral email address and don't mention too many identifying details. Sorry, I've no idea if any lists even exist, but I'd assume they do. Why be so sneaky? I'd blurt it right out... Hi, I'm Bill and I work for XYZ Corp. We're currently consolidating down to one authoring tool from three, and we're down to deciding between FrameMaker and Quicksilver. I'm looking for pros and cons to moving to Quicksilver over FrameMaker. I asked a similar question about FrameMaker on the FrameUsers list. If you'd like, I'll post a summary of both findings. Thanks! -- Bill Swallow HATT List Owner WWP-Users List Owner 42.8162,-73.7736 http://techcommdood.blogspot.com I support Char James-Tanny for STC Secretary. ___ You are currently subscribed to Framers as [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.
Frame vs. Quicksilver - Please help me save Frame
I've only seen Quicksilver/Interleaf demo'd for me, but from what I saw, the cost of (re)training could be much greater too. I could be wrong, but I thought it made FrameMaker look simple. If most of your users are coming from Word, it could be easier, and therefore, cheaper to switch to Frame. Just from a cost viewpoint (per seat, training, etc.), why not ask the Interleaf users to justify *their* position? David Creamer I.D.E.A.S. - Results-Oriented Training http://www.IDEAStraining.com Adobe Certified (since 1995) for ALL Print and Web Publishing-related software Authorized Quark Provider (since 1988) Markzware, Enfocus, FileMaker Certified Apple Certified Consultant (since 1990)
Frame vs. Quicksilver - Please help me save Frame
At 5:47 am -0800 19/1/06, David Creamer wrote: >I've only seen Quicksilver/Interleaf demo'd for me, but from what I saw, the >cost of (re)training could be much greater too. I could be wrong, but I >thought it made FrameMaker look simple. If most of your users are coming >from Word, it could be easier, and therefore, cheaper to switch to Frame. I have used both, although I've not used Interleaf since Version 5 (?) back in the early-mid 90s. From what I remember, it was horrifically arcane (navigating about seven levels of pop-up menu just to type a '?' sign, for example), and the graphics were worse, far worse, than FrameMaker's - objects moved their relative positions when zoomed. And you needed [allegedly] one full-time 'Interleaf Administrator' per fifteen or so seats, a major extra cost. It might have improved since Broadvision got hold of it, but I doubt it. It did have one or two very impressive features, however, such as 'live' import of templates into open documents - which could cause consternation in writing teams as their documents reformatted themselves on screen while the template writer tinkered with stuff. Although I never used it also had a 'round-trip' Word filter that was intended to allow IL documents to be shipped out to Word-equipped authors and back with no loss of information. Just an off-the-wall idea, but why not run the Fm and IL teams against each other in a writer's shootout ;-) More seriously, I would have thought that product longevity and cost of ownership would be your killer points, but productivity's worth a try too. -- Steve
Frame vs. Quicksilver - Please help me save Frame
4. Frame is more widely used and offers greater compatibility with the rest of the publishing world. Related to this is if/when the time comes that you need a contractor to do something fast, you are a lot more likely to find a Frame pro than an Interleaf one. This applies to new hires, too, if the boss is unwilling to wait for someone to come up to speed.
Frame vs. Quicksilver - Please help me save Frame
Joe, A few more factors to think about including in your business case... * numbers of users of each tool * approximate number of existing pages in each tool * platforms/OS in use and on which your products run And, although I haven't had contact with them for years, Adobe used to maintain some field sales support pros that got involved when some level of corporate decision- making was taking place in order to push the case. They provided demos, CBAs, integration scenarios, etc. Very useful resources; stuff you won't find from the off-the-shelf software vendords. Art On 1/18/06, Sims, Joseph wrote: > 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 -- Art Campbell art.campbell at gmail.com "... In my opinion, there's nothing in this world beats a '52 Vincent and a redheaded girl." -- Richard Thompson No disclaimers apply. DoD 358
Frame vs. Quicksilver - Please help me save Frame
Art Campbell wrote: > off-the-shelf software vendords. Is that, like, Retail Warlords?? ;-) -- Stuart Rogers Technical Communicator Phoenix Geophysics Limited Toronto, ON, Canada +1 (416) 491-7340 x 325 srogers at phoenix-geophysics dot com "Please reinstall the application you want to remove." --Microsoft Windows 'unInstall Specialist' Get Firefox! http://tinyurl.com/8q9c5
Frame vs. Quicksilver - Please help me save Frame
One point that I haven't seen mentioned yet is the ability to customize the tools. FrameMaker has a robust SDK, plus FrameScript, dzBatcher, FrameAC, and a wide variety of available plug-ins/scripts to perform a myriad of tasks. While many similar tools may exist for Ileaf/Quicksilver, a comparison of costs will be very revealing. And if customization is needed that is not already available from third-parties, what will it cost to program the desired capability? Compare a scripted solution (e.g. FrameScript), a DLL plug-in for Frame (C programming via the FDK) and Ileaf/Quicksilver using their Lisp-based programming language. On Wednesday, January 18, 2006 04:21 PM, Sims, Joseph wrote: | 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 - Lester --- Lester C. Smalley Email: lsmalley AT infocon DOT com Information Consultants, Inc. Phone: 302-239-2942 FAX: 302-239-1712 Yorklyn, DE 19736Web: www.infocon.com ---
Frame vs. Quicksilver - Please help me save Frame
Okay, I just ran a search on Monster.com to see how many jobs had "Interleaf" vs. "Framemaker" as a keyword. (No geographic limits, so this represents the whole US but just what is listed today) The results: Interleaf 6 (yes, 6, as in one more than five) Quicksilver [Broadvision product] 5 (as in one less than six) Framemaker 233 Now there are all kinds of caveats that need to be attached this little experiment but the numbers are suggestive to say the least. Tanya G DISCLAIMER: I don't represent anyone but myself.
Frame vs. Quicksilver - Please help me save Frame
>>I thought that IL was effectively a dead product - web<< Me too, Bill! But I just Googled Interleaf and learned that Quicksilver is the new brand name for the original Interleaf code. So IL is alive and well, just now known as Quicksilver. Give me FM any day over that IL/Quicksilver product. It's clunky, klugy, and weird in more ways then one, IL that is, imho. Rita Muller Technical Writer Morrow Technologies Corporation
Frame vs. Quicksilver - Please help me save Frame
Hi Joe, I have used both. I would use Framemaker over Interleaf (QuickSilver) anyday. I learned Framemaker on my own and I would hate to have tried to learn InterLeaf that way. I am not sure what the support is like now for QuickSilver but it got spotty for InterLeaf. Z ** Ann Zdunczyk President a2z Publishing, Inc. (336)922-1271 Cell: (336)456-4493 http://www.a2z-pub.com ** -Original Message- From: framers-bounces+azdunczyk=triad.rr@lists.frameusers.com [mailto:framers-bounces+azdunczyk=triad.rr.com at lists.frameusers.com] On Behalf Of Sims, Joseph Sent: Wednesday, January 18, 2006 4:21 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 585-784-6969 jsims at gleason.com ___ You are currently subscribed to Framers as azdunczyk at triad.rr.com. To unsubscribe send a blank email to framers-unsubscribe at lists.frameusers.com or visit http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/azdunczyk%40triad.rr.com Send administrative questions to lisa at frameusers.com. Visit http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info.
Frame vs. Quicksilver - Please help me save Frame
> I thought that IL was effectively a dead product
I believe it is but Broadvision is now producing Quicksilver, and they
claim they can work with FM files. Might be something for your
heel-stuck group to look into and report back on. ("Automatically
assembles documents from a variety of sources including Microsoft
Word, WordPerfect and FrameMaker.")
--
Bill Swallow
HATT List Owner
WWP-Users List Owner
42.8162,-73.7736
http://techcommdood.blogspot.com
I support Char James-Tanny for STC Secretary.
Frame vs. Quicksilver - Please help me save Frame
We've heard a lot about how much better FM is than IL, and I don't doubt
any of it. Great points.
But wouldn't the IL side of the house be building a case as well? I'm
curious what justification they claim for their cause.
Glenn
-Original Message-
From: framers-bounces+glenn.voyles=mitchell@lists.frameusers.com
[mailto:framers-bounces+glenn.voyles=mitchell.com at lists.frameusers.com]
On Behalf Of Bill Swallow
Sent: Thursday, January 19, 2006 12:23
To: Bill Briggs
Cc: framers at lists.frameusers.com
Subject: Re: Frame vs. Quicksilver - Please help me save Frame
> I thought that IL was effectively a dead product
I believe it is but Broadvision is now producing Quicksilver, and they
claim they can work with FM files. Might be something for your
heel-stuck group to look into and report back on. ("Automatically
assembles documents from a variety of sources including Microsoft
Word, WordPerfect and FrameMaker.")
--
Bill Swallow
HATT List Owner
WWP-Users List Owner
42.8162,-73.7736
http://techcommdood.blogspot.com
I support Char James-Tanny for STC Secretary.
___
You are currently subscribed to Framers as glenn.voyles at mitchell.com.
To unsubscribe send a blank email to
framers-unsubscribe at lists.frameusers.com
or visit
http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/glenn.voyles%40mitch
ell.com
Send administrative questions to lisa at frameusers.com. Visit
http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info.
Frame vs. Quicksilver - Please help me save Frame
You're probably right. My group (prior to my coming on board) used to use IL and switched to FM. I ran into a need for using IL when I had to dig up some old docs. Very arcane, manual tool. On 1/19/06, Ridder, Fred wrote: > I'd almost guarantee that for 80% of the Interleaf users, the only > factor that really matters is that they don't have to change what > they've been doing for the last dozen years. They've got a lot of > time and energy invested on making it second nature to use a > tool that most people consider arcane. They simply don't want > to forced to change to *any* other tool that might involve a similar > learning curve. The more difficult a tool was to learn, the more > likely it is that proficient users will be strongly averse to adopting > a new tool (unless they are tool geeks like me...) -- Bill Swallow HATT List Owner WWP-Users List Owner 42.8162,-73.7736 http://techcommdood.blogspot.com I support Char James-Tanny for STC Secretary.
Frame vs. Quicksilver - Please help me save Frame
> Solicit opinions from a IL/Quicksilver list in the same manner. Beware > though as some of your colleagues may be on those lists - write from a > neutral email address and don't mention too many identifying details. > Sorry, I've no idea if any lists even exist, but I'd assume they do. Why be so sneaky? I'd blurt it right out... "Hi, I'm Bill and I work for XYZ Corp. We're currently consolidating down to one authoring tool from three, and we're down to deciding between FrameMaker and Quicksilver. I'm looking for pros and cons to moving to Quicksilver over FrameMaker. I asked a similar question about FrameMaker on the FrameUsers list. If you'd like, I'll post a summary of both findings. Thanks!" -- Bill Swallow HATT List Owner WWP-Users List Owner 42.8162,-73.7736 http://techcommdood.blogspot.com I support Char James-Tanny for STC Secretary.
RE: Frame vs. Quicksilver - Please help me save Frame
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: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Sims, Joseph Sent: Wednesday, January 18, 2006 2:21 PM To: framers@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 585-784-6969 [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ You are currently subscribed to Framers as [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] or visit http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/k.zorn%40zorntech.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] 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.
Re: Frame vs. Quicksilver - Please help me save Frame
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: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Sims, Joseph Sent: Wednesday, January 18, 2006 2:21 PM To: framers@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 ___ You are currently subscribed to Framers as [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.
Re: Frame vs. Quicksilver - Please help me save Frame
At 4:20 PM -0500 1/18/06, Sims, Joseph wrote: 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 thought that IL was effectively a dead product - web ___ You are currently subscribed to Framers as [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.
Re: Frame vs. Quicksilver - Please help me save Frame
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. It seems to me that the best way to state your FM case is because it is a compromise between the two. IL may want to be the standard, but coould your company afford to convert all the Word and FM seats to IL? OTOH, if the IL and FM users made a good case for advanced features, could the Word camp comply? Also...could you imagine the cost and process of converting the Word people to use IL? You might want to try that approach. John Posada Senior Technical Writer So long and thanks for all the fish. ___ You are currently subscribed to Framers as [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.
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 585-784-6969 jsims at gleason.com
Frame vs. Quicksilver - Please help me save Frame
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@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 585-784-6969 jsims at gleason.com ___ You are currently subscribed to Framers as k.zorn at zorntech.com. To unsubscribe send a blank email to framers-unsubscribe at lists.frameusers.com or visit http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/k.zorn%40zorntech.com Send administrative questions to lisa at frameusers.com. Visit http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info.
Frame vs. Quicksilver - Please help me save Frame
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
Frame vs. Quicksilver - Please help me save Frame
At 4:20 PM -0500 1/18/06, Sims, Joseph wrote: >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 thought that IL was effectively a dead product - web
Frame vs. Quicksilver - Please help me save Frame
> 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. It seems to me that the best way to state your FM case is because it is a compromise between the two. IL may want to be the standard, but coould your company afford to convert all the Word and FM seats to IL? OTOH, if the IL and FM users made a good case for advanced features, could the Word camp comply? Also...could you imagine the cost and process of converting the Word people to use IL? You might want to try that approach. John Posada Senior Technical Writer "So long and thanks for all the fish."
