FrameMaker 8

[trent the thief]

What's your take on FM8?

[KevinDAmery]

Which option would people who don't use Frame because they produce online documentation exclusively use?

In my case, I have no idea if Frame 8 is good or bad, because it's not in the right category of tools to fit my needs. If I did more print docs, I'd probably be looking at it more closely. It's a little like asking a motorcycle owner what they think about the latest pickup truck.

('Course, I'm still really looking forward to seeing Blaze )

[trent the thief]

Ordinarily, I would agree. But since this is in the Frame output section, I kinda thought it was a valid question.

[KevinDAmery]

Ah, yes, well One of these days I'll learn to look where I am before I post....

Carry on, just a guy making a fool of himself, nothing to see here.....

[trent the thief]

Nah, it's okay Kevin. Not everyone can be lucky enough to be a player in the elite, big-time arena of the highly paid and utterly infallible Frame Maker righters.

[LTinker68]

Nah, it's okay Kevin. Not everyone can be lucky enough to be a player in the elite, big-time arena of the highly paid and utterly infallible Frame Maker righters.

[gwadmin]

Looks somewhat interesting, though I have no immediate compelling reason to upgrade (I don't need those features for my current clients...plus I'd have to upgrade FrameScript as well)

Still pissed that they dropped the mac version.

BTW, no surprise that it doesn't show up in the [not so] \"short list\" Product menu on Adobe's home page.

[trent the thief]

I think they are taking a microshaft approach and only updated it so that other packages can no longer handle their binaries.

Nothing I see in FM 8 justifies a major upgrade. IMHO, it should have become FM 7.3, not 8.0.

I was mad when they dropped the linux version. I used it quite a bit in tandem with my windows install.

[RamonS]

For me it is a non-even as I haven't used FM in the past and although I id think about looking into that I rather wait and spend my time on Blaze. I did work with FM7.2 for a short while and really wondered where the developers got their GUI design ideas. FM operates like no other application on the planet and that is probably why people tend to think of FM to be difficult to learn.

[KevinDAmery]

I agree. Some times even after I've found a tool in Frame, I ask myself \"why the heck did they put it there?\"

[trent the thief]

FM began as a UNIX-based publishing system.

http://www.daube.ch/docu/fmhist00.html

I've been using it since 91. I love it. It improved steadily under Frame Technologies stewardship, providing topnotch, free tech support, on-site demos, free maintenance releases....Then macrobe bought it. Things went downhill from there.

I'm using 7.2. I probably won't upgrade. 8.0 is a waste of plastic.

[trusswalker]

We've already upgraded... but mostly for 3D object and Flash embedding. Both work great and since we already develop Flash content for our website (some of which is suitable for use in the overview sections) and design everything in SolidWorks... we have access to the 3D models...

It's a bummer that Flare doesn't support FM8 files... saving stuff back is a serious pain. Even if it didn't support the new object types.

But yeah... past that... it still really is more like v7.3... maybe v7.5

Just my .02

[doc_guy]

Welcome to the forums, trusswalker.

If you would like to see support for FM8, you should submit a feature request.

[trent the thief]

Unlike Adobe, who has ignored requests for tab releases and removal of forced returns in $PARATEXT for years, Madcap listens and makes their products do what we need them to do.

Yeah, and welcome aboard, too!