Is LaTeX obsolete? Is FrameMaker superior?
GJC Lokhorst
stopped using LaTeX because he felt that it was antique and
outdated. He is now using Adobe FrameMaker. He told me that it
is far easier to use, even when typesetting mathematics, and
that its output is at least as good as that of LaTeX. Now I
believe that Adobe FrameMaker is rather expensive, so I am
hesitant about buying it. Has anybody on this list made the
same transition? Is FrameMaker indeed superior to LaTeX?
Gert-Jan C. Lokhorst,
Erasmus University Rotterdam
GJC Lokhorst
GJC Lokhorst
Allin Cottrell
>
> The foremost TeX-guru at my university told me that he has
> stopped using LaTeX because he felt that it was antique and
> outdated.
Sounds like BS to me. What's "antique and outdated" supposed to
mean? Lacking a glitzy GUI?
--
Allin Cottrell
Department of Economics
Wake Forest University, NC
Rebecca and Rowland
> The foremost TeX-guru at my university told me that he has
> stopped using LaTeX because he felt that it was antique and
> outdated.
That's what people say when they won't admit to their real reason.
> He is now using Adobe FrameMaker. He told me that it
> is far easier to use, even when typesetting mathematics, and
> that its output is at least as good as that of LaTeX. Now I
> believe that Adobe FrameMaker is rather expensive, so I am
> hesitant about buying it. Has anybody on this list made the
> same transition? Is FrameMaker indeed superior to LaTeX?
It depends what your needs are. If you absolutely must have a wysiwyg
interface (etc), Framemaker might be adequate. It's much harder to
typeset maths with Framemaker than with LaTeX, and Framemaker's basic
typesetting abilities are pathetic when compared to TeX.
The question ought to be this: does LaTeX do what you want it to? If it
does, why spend money buying something you don't need, just because
someone tells you to?
Rowland.
--
Remove the animal for my email address: reb...@astrid.dog.u-net.com
Sorry - the spam got to me. PGP pub key A680B89D
UK biker? Join MAG and help keep bureaucracy at bay
http://dredd.meng.ucl.ac.uk/www/mag/mag.html
Dean Neumann
> The foremost TeX-guru at my university told me that he has
> stopped using LaTeX because he felt that it was antique and
> is far easier to use, even when typesetting mathematics, and
> that its output is at least as good as that of LaTeX.
Ask your guru friend how to put Frame documents under version control so
that the current revision number of your document gets automatically
inserted into the running heads that appear on each page.
Framemaker uses a binary file format that does not lend itself to use
with CM tools. You cannot, for example, make a title page or page
headers/footers which include keywords, such as current revision number
or last-changed-date, which the CM tool will substitute with the correct
values whenever you retrieve a version of the document from the
repository. For a tool which claims to be for technical publishing,
this is a serious deficiency (in fact, anyone attempting to use Frame in
an ISO 9001 environment will have had to justify to an ISO auditor how
one can trust that the revision number that appears in a Frame document
is correct). The *only* way to get a CM tool to do automatic expansion
of keywords during document retrieval is to export the document into
Maker Interchange Format (MIF, an ASCII "tagged" file format), and then
commit the MIF to the repository. Unfortunately, this is not without
complications; there are several Frame bugs and limitations that will be
encountered during the export/import steps.
LaTeX, being ASCII file based, has no such limitation.
--
Dean Neumann (dneu...@neumann-associates.com)
Neumann & Associates Information Systems Inc.
Note: Remember to delete the ".delete-this-part"
portion of the return address before replying.
whobutg...@my-dejanews.com
real-addr...@flur.bltigibbet (Rebecca and Rowland) wrote:
> It's much harder to
> typeset maths with Framemaker than with LaTeX, and Framemaker's basic
> typesetting abilities are pathetic when compared to TeX.
How polite and diplomatic this statement of yours is!
I would just say:
F(rameM)aker isn't worth the money you have to pay.
IIRC, they (Adobe) advertise it as "industrial strength" typesetting
system --- but IMO it's just poor, sooooo poor, poor ad nauseam.
LaTeX2e is simply better in so many respects ...
> The question ought to be this: does LaTeX do what you want it to? If it
> does, why spend money buying something you don't need, just because
> someone tells you to?
Definitely true!
It's just a waste to pay a single EURO (or whatever) for such a program!
Hubert
<Gaes...@BNeD.com>
-----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==----------
http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own
Rebecca and Rowland
> In article <1dj3pfe.lqa...@p21.nas1.is5.u-net.net>,
> real-addr...@flur.bltigibbet (Rebecca and Rowland) wrote:
>
> > It's much harder to
> > typeset maths with Framemaker than with LaTeX, and Framemaker's basic
> > typesetting abilities are pathetic when compared to TeX.
>
> How polite and diplomatic this statement of yours is!
That's sarcasm, isn't it? But no need: I *was* being polite and
diplomatic.
[snip]
Henrik Martensson
certainly valid. However, though there are some minor bugs in the MIF
import/export filters, they rarely cause any trouble. (Except in FM 5.5,
which was nothing but trouble, but that version was short lived.) I work
with FrameMaker a lot, and, except for with FM 5.5, it is a couple of years
since I even saw a MIF import/export problem.
The last modification date can be updated automatically by using one of the
two Modification Date document variables. Revision numbering can also be
automated, either by editing a MIF file (a trivial excercise using a small
Perl program), or by using a text inset to reference an external file
containing the information.
FrameMaker 5.5.6 is ODMA compatible, which makes it compatible with many
document management systems. I haven't tested it yet, so I cannot tell you
if it actually works. :-)
For most writers, FrameMaker presents a much friendlier authoring
environment than LaTeX. FrameMaker is also easier to learn. A person
familiar with the basic concepts of authoring software, and GUIs, can
install FrameMaker and begin to work within a couple of minutes. Getting
started with LaTeX is a bit more difficult.
I will use myself as an example. I am a technical writer, and I also do a
bit of programming when the mood strikes me. Though I generally prefer GUIs,
I am familiar with command line interfaces, and use both every day. I
installed LaTeX a couple of days ago, and haven't gotten started working
with it yet. There is simply too much information to digest in the little
time I can set aside to learn new software. I bought a LaTeX book, but it
took more time just to read the introduction than it would take to get going
with a GUI based system like FrameMaker. Indeed, I installed a new GUI based
SGML editor the day before I installed LaTeX. Despite having spent more time
on LaTeX, I have learned a lot more about using the GUI based SGML system.
Granted, it will probably not take me more than a weekend to get going with
LaTeX, but it may be several months before I have a weekend to spare.
Personally, I expect to get a lot of mileage from LaTeX as a typesetting
tool for SGML documents. I do not intend to write documents using LaTeX
markup codes directly.
--
Henrik Martensson
GNOSIS-Gruppen
Technical Documentation Services
Dean Neumann wrote in message <36600C1D...@neumann-associates.com>...