How is the Adobe Technical Communication Suite specifically better than the MadPak Professional Suite?

[Guest]

No further details than what was stated in the question.

[Jeff_Coatsworth]

Short answer - that depends.

Longer answer - since suites generally give you a price break on the component parts, you really need to examine the individual parts of each suite and compare them with each other. Are you just starting out fresh or do you have legacy content in one or the other? That would impact your decision-making too.

[Guest]

Legacy content as from other sources or?

[Jeff_Coatsworth]

Legacy content as in old FM docs or old Flare material.

[Bob_Niland]

MPS and TCS appear entirely dissimilar.

From my perspective, TCS mainly adds RH and full Acrobat to FM. I'm not sure I'd have any real use for Captivate or Presenter, but some might. RH turns FM into a multi-path publishing tool. FM already has collaboration features.

Not having looked at it lately, my impression was that Flare has been a multi-path publishing tool all along. What's added with MPS looks like mostly useless shovelware in terms of my needs. Yours might vary, such as the translation support add-on.

I might add that it's not surprising that questions of this sort arise here, because Adobe's product pages are utterly and completely useless to anyone seeking decision support information, instead of flashy content-free web fodder. I had to look through back traffic in the forum to find a link to a simple summary of what exactly is in TCS for the current release.