TechWhirl (TECHWR-L) is a resource for technical writing and technical communications professionals of all experience levels and in all industries to share their experiences and acquire information.
For two decades, technical communicators have turned to TechWhirl to ask and answer questions about the always-changing world of technical communications, such as tools, skills, career paths, methodologies, and emerging industries. The TechWhirl Archives and magazine, created for, by and about technical writers, offer a wealth of knowledge to everyone with an interest in any aspect of technical communications.
Subject:Interleaf vs. FrameMaker From:Alexander Von_obert <avobert -at- TWH -dot- MSN -dot- SUB -dot- ORG> Date:Fri, 1 Nov 1996 22:34:01 +0100
Hello Nikki,
* Antwort auf eine Nachricht von Nikki Blomquist an All am 30.10.96
NB> From: Nikki Blomquist <nikkib -at- WATER -dot- CA -dot- GOV>
NB> During this project, we will be
NB> phasing in PCs and phasing out our UNIX workstations. Because
NB> of the
NB> cost of maintaining Interleaf, we are considering switching to
NB> FrameMaker because it sounds like the best alternative to
NB> Interleaf.
Why should you switch from Interleaf? Framemaker does not come cheap and you
would have to learn a completely new software system.
I have used Interleaf 5.4.1 for DOS for quite some time. Shurely, it is its own
world. But unless you cannot do with it what you need to do, why should you
change? Interleaf on PC hardware is cheaper than the UNIX versions and you
could continue to use all your old documents.
