Windows, MacOS, or Linux? Which platform would you prefer for writing technical documentation?

[#1]

Which platform would you prefer for writing technical documentation? Windows, MacOS, or Linux?

Let us know and make your vote in this poll on Twitter:

https://twitter.com/AdobeTCS/status/1085878070068813825

Not on Twitter? Let us know your thoughts in the comments below.

[#2]

Which platform would you prefer for writing technical documentation? Windows, MacOS, or Linux?

Let us know and make your vote in this poll on Twitter:

https://twitter.com/AdobeTCS/status/1085878070068813825

Not on Twitter? Let us know your thoughts in the comments below.

[#3]

Windows ;>)

[#4]

Windows

[#5]

If I were vice president for strategic Framemaker platform planning, these might be my priorities:

0. Continue supporting Windows, of course. At what point to drop 32-bit is an open question.
1. TCS as a cloud service, and let me be precise about "cloud". I mean runs in the cloud — no code at all strictly required on the client. The client only needs a modern browser and suitably ample display real estate. I seem to recall that Adobe had this working as an FM product demo back around the turn of the century.
2. Make sure current Windows version runs on at least one Linux emulator, such as WINE. Work with the community as needed.
3. Native Linux port (which Adobe has done before, as well as Unix). Some debate is likely needed regarding which distro and UI to focus on. Native Android per se might not be needed if #1(cloud) is in place.
4. MacOS (because the other Adobe products are already there, and FM has been there).

Retain the option of perpetual vs. subscription license. Make the subs license a monthly rate, and available for periods less than a year.

Personally, when MS pulls the plug on Win7, I'm done with Redmond. I want nothing to do with Win10, ever. I lately rebuilt my prior AMD64 machine to see what's involved in migrating my home-office workload to Debian/Gnome.

[#6]

Seeing a web-based version would be great, providing it works on Day 1, and the performance rivals Fm 2019.

I would wonder about performance on very large projects, as well as how PDF processing might be slowed down.

On another front...having a Mac version would be great for those of us that run Win on an emulator.

[#7]

Have you actually asked the question you meant to ask? I do more and more of my work in DITA, using a platform-agnostic IDE instead of FM: so I'm quite happy to use an old Linux box with low power consumption :-} OK, the interface isn't rendered as elegantly as it is on Windows – but I get all the functionality I want. That's what I could dream of for FM as well: full functionality, independent of platform, and optimised for each o/s.

Back at the larger question of "technical communications" my answer has to be I'm stuck with / survive with WIndows – and not really complaining, because it's the corporate environment and nothing's going to change. There's no native FM on Mac, as far as I understand, and I'm allergic to the UI of the Linux answers to Illustrator, InDesign and PhotoShop. (and to the Mac "Finder", but that's a different question …)

All in all, my preferences would be driven by tools, not platforms. FM, Illustrator, InDesign, PhotoShop, Acrobat Pro … plus a couple of text editors, a DITA authoring environment and (occasionally) a spreadsheet for some text-wrangling. At the moment, the platform that delivers this toolset best, for me, seems to be Windows.

[#8]

Windows 10,

Linux (To show my support guys, that FM is a tool of the future)

No need for Mac