🚀 go-pugleaf

  >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). 

I would suppose you evaluated the beta release, which was Frame 0.6.  This
would be in the late '86, early '87 time frame.  Since then, 1.0 (and 1.1)
have been released, with big improvements in speed and functionality.  You
should seriously consider a new look, since Frame is still 1/6 the price
of Interleaf.  The graphics tools are much better, and the handling of
paragraph and document formats is much improved.  Overall speed is better,
and print speed is a lot better.

Chuck Musciano
chuck@trantor.harris-atd.com
----------------------------------------
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