Importing FrameMaker files and into Flare

[Richard Ferrell]

The response to the “Importing FrameMaker files and into Flare” webinar is overwhelming. So we've added one that's more convenient for you to attend in your local time zone. This special webinar is on 21 July at 7am Pacific time, 2pm GMT.

For current GMT time visit: http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=GMT+Time


MadCap Software is presenting a new 1 hour webinar called “Importing FrameMaker files into Flare”. Learn Best Practices and discover what you need to be most effective as you move into the future with Flare. This webinar covers each step of the FrameMaker to Flare import process:
- what to select
- why to select it
- how these selections impact you when you’re done

Given by FrameMaker expert Sharon Burton, product manager at MadCap Software, this webinar covers real world issues to help you get the results you want.

Go to http://www.madcapsoftware.com/training/livedemos.aspx. Scroll down to the Moving from FrameMaker to Flare area. Click the demo for 21 July at 7am Pacific and follow the instructions on the screen.

The webinar is limited to the first 25 people or sites who sign up. Hope you can join us!

[i-tietz]

Hi there MadCappers,
we would have liked to attend one of thoses webinars, but our sys admin doesn't want to open the port 8200 which he says gotomeeting is "firing at permanently".
Is it really that dangerous?

Quote from the gotomeeting website:
"When GoToMeeting software is activated on a computer, it initiates one or more outbound, SSL-protected TCP connections with the GoToMeeting service, using ports that are already open in most firewalls and proxies (ports 8200, 443. and/or 80). Whichever connection responds first is used, and the others are dropped. It thus provides a high degree of compatibility with your existing network security."

Reading the quote, wouldn't you get the idea, too, that it is any ONE of the named ports? We thought we could use the ports 443 or 80, which are open, but it still doesn't work ...
Apart from that our sys admin wasn't happy either about the g2m-software that was installed on my PC ...
Is he paranoid or rightfully cautious?

[RamonS]

Is he paranoid or rightfully cautious?

Both. It is his job to keep the network and the assets used within safe and that means having less ports open and having less non-standard software installed is better. Yet, there is a balancing act between security and usability. One extreme is to turn all system off and unplug them, the other is to let everyone from the inside and outside do whatever they want. I think that way too many IT folks push the security issue too much and prevent people from doing their work. It may also be that this is the only way to "stick it to the man" just to compensate for the silly salaries they get.
What I found to work out well is to have a secure network and an entirely separate less secure parallel network that doesn't have file or web servers, backups, or any of that pretty stuff. There is a DSL/Fibre modem with NAT and the typical home user security measures that connects to a small network that runs PCs that are used for testing or special uses like this one. IT can even turn the internet connection off when no request for use is scheduled so that the folks don't get the idea that it is OK to watch TV streams while working (although, if someone does that then HR hired the wrong people!).
There is a solution for cases like that and IT should even like this one since it includes technology. It gets you the training you need and gives IT the peace of mind that nothing funky is on the corporate network. The expenses for this are "peanuts".

[Huoliuhi]

bump the thread up.