Skip to main content
Bob_Niland
Community Expert
Community Expert
December 12, 2011
Question

Framemaker Competitive Comparisons ?

  • December 12, 2011
  • 2 replies
  • 1275 views

Are there any current sources (Adobe or not) comparing Frame to contemporary tech pubs solutions?

A casual google turns up some hits, none recent, and some seriously outdated (1999).

I'm particularly interested in FM vs. Arbortext, because I suspect that it may be being pitched to management, unbeknownst to the Tech Pubs Dept (a standard PTC tactic, I hear). Since AT is focused on a structured XML environment, this question perhaps belongs in the Structured forum, but we are presently an unstructured shop, and would need to assess any such transition from that point of view.

I see basically zero competitive info on the Adobe FM product pages. I'm wondering if this is due to lack of marketing resources to create the content, because the pro-FM story isn't necessarily compelling, or just because Adobe likes to pretend that there is no competition.

The recent, and so far lackluster "Dispelling some myths on FrameMaker" is also missing the mark. It so far reads like those "get the facts" web sites that politicians put up, filled with non-denial denials and providing hard-hitting answers to unasked questions.

    This topic has been closed for replies.

    2 replies

    Bob_Niland
    Community Expert
    Community Expert
    December 13, 2011

    Based on a read of the free 2007 edition, this $50 document might be a useful aid to anyone contemplating either a move to structured, or just a change in authoring application.

    http://www.scriptorium.com/books/the-state-of-structured-authoring-second-edition/

    Inspiring
    December 12, 2011

    Hi Error7103

    I haven't seen any recent comparisons either, but if you find a comparison between FrameMaker and Arbortext, make sure you also include DITA-FMx in the equation. DITA-FMx offers A LOT more than FrameMaker, as you can see in this comparison:

    http://leximation.com/dita-fmx/featurecomparison.php

    Also, think about the output (deliverables) which you want to generate from your XML content how much the development of the respective style sheets (especially PDF) will cost.

    Cheers

    Yves Barbion

    www.scripto.nu

    Bob_Niland
    Community Expert
    Community Expert
    December 12, 2011

    ... make sure you also include DITA-FMx in the equation ...

    And that probably has a bottom line that is less than switching to AT.

    Both solutions, however, are way overkill for our deliverable (PDF). Although I can see multi-flow XML being needed in the future, and we're already growing re-used content (as formatted text insets) I'm concerned that a management desire to "simplify" user manual authoring raises concerns of:

    • how long to architect (and how easily changed)
    • how long to migrate recent and legacy content
    • do we retain automagic TOC and IX
    • do we retain extensive automagic Xref hyperlinks
    • do we retain full flexibility in object imports
    • do we retain straightforward conditional domestic/export versioning
    • do we retain manual control of page breaks where needed
    • can we even re-migrate the content if the vendor becomes a problem

    We already use a proprietary XML publishing solution for parts manuals. It's easy and frustrating to use, suboptimal graphically, unreliable, limiting, inextensible, and probably a vendor lock-in. What's not to like.