I don't buy that at all. DITA has major costs that are not offset
unless you have substantial opportunities for reuse and publish in
multiple languages.
There's no rational reason to spend money on low-value upgrades. Do a
cost-benefit analysis and know what you're paying for. At one old job
we
Adobe says it supports DocBook and various other things besides DITA:
http://www.adobe.com/products/framemakerxmlauthor/features.html
On Fri, Jan 24, 2014 at 6:24 AM, Bernard Gagne bernyga...@rogers.com wrote:
That's great as long as you use DITA. We use DocBook so FrameMaker XML
Author (which
Adobe also says it does not support DocBook:
http://www.adobe.com/ca/products/framemakerxmlauthor/faq.html (see
What is the difference ...)
On Mon, Jan 27, 2014 at 10:01 AM, Robert Lauriston rob...@lauriston.com wrote:
Adobe says it supports DocBook and various other things besides DITA:
That's great as long as you use DITA. We use DocBook so FrameMaker XML Author
(which should more appropriately be called FrameMaker DITA Author) is useless.
Oxygen and XMetal have nothing to fear.
Berny Gagne
Senior Technical Writer
Siemens Canada
On Thursday, January 23, 2014 8:28:02 AM,
At 11:28 -0800 22/1/14, Syed Zaeem Hosain (syed.hos...@aeris.net) wrote:
The unhappy ones are probably the small users - like myself - who helped
FrameMaker become what it is and Adobe *clearly* does not care about us
anymore. That is unlike the founders of Frame Technology who I met many years
My guess is Adobe's goal in creating FrameMaker XML Author and pricing
it at $400 is to eliminate the cost savings incentive for structured
FrameMaker users to switch to Oxygen or XMetal instead of adding more
FM seats.
Also, at $400, I doubt if FrameMaker XML Author is going to be able to
At 07:49 -0800 22/1/14, Syed Zaeem Hosain (syed.hos...@aeris.net) wrote:
Financial success by large companies is not the only measure of success that
matters. It is why in my 35+ years of work, I have chosen to do many small
startups and try to only work for small companies. My current startup
Excellent point by Syed. Another point that is easy to miss in this
discussion: If all of Adobe's products had the level of quality control that
FrameMaker has (long-standing and new bugs, outdated and incomplete
documentation, etc.), Adobe certainly wouldn't be as successful as it is. In
my
Rick Quatro said:
Excellent point by Syed. Another point that is easy to miss in this
discussion: If all of Adobe's products had the level of quality control that
FrameMaker has (long-standing and new bugs, outdated and incomplete
documentation, etc.), Adobe certainly wouldn't be as
