🚀 go-pugleaf

I can appreciate the need to keep within the boundaries of a user interface
(such as the Sun and the Macintosh). I believe that companies should make all
efforts to work within that interface. However, the bottom line is...what
enables me to get my job done, be more productive, and therefore, save me
money?

A word on Framemaker...I evaluated this product for about 2 months on
a Sun. Conclusion? Slow...Real slow. Framemaker's graphics capabilities
did not meet my demands. The word processing features were good - 
not as good as Interleaf though. As a matter of fact, there was nothing
about Framemaker that was better than Interleaf, except the learning curve and
price.  (Big factors, I know.) Framemaker support people told me that a
new release of the software was due out within a few months (that was about 
1 1/2 years ago). 

>From my evaluations, I concluded that Interleaf
was the better package and had the speed and features to do large volume
publishing. I would appreciate, however,  if someone would share
their feelings on a more recent review of Framemaker, possibly even a
comparison between Framemaker and Interleaf. My evaluation is pushing two
years old and I know Interleaf has revised their package. I suspect Framemaker
has done the same as well.

One final note: I am not condemning Framemaker. I believe it is the right tool
for small volume, office-type publishing on the Sun. It runs under sun windows
and is easy enough to learn and operate. Large volume publishing? Not unless
they did a major revision to their software.

Barry Lyden
barry@hcx1.SSD.HARRIS.COM
"The opinions expressed here are solely my own and
 do not necessarily reflect those of my employer."
----------------------------------------
Submissions to:   desktop%plaid@sun.com -OR- sun!plaid!desktop
Administrivia to: desktop-request%plaid@sun.com -OR- sun!plaid!desktop-request
Paths:  {ihnp4,decwrl,hplabs,seismo,ucbvax}!sun