Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!lll-winken!lll-tis!ames!ncar!husc6!rice!sun-spots-request From: bernhold@orange.qtp.ufl.edu (David E. Bernholdt) Newsgroups: comp.sys.sun Subject: Re: Publisher vs FrameMaker Message-ID: <394@orange9.qtp.ufl.edu> Date: 14 Dec 88 17:22:12 GMT References: <8811221317.AA03471@trantor.harris-atd.com> Sender: usenet@rice.edu Organization: Rice University, Houston, Texas Lines: 96 Approved: Sun-Spots@rice.edu Original-Date: 3 Dec 88 16:59:11 GMT X-Sun-Spots-Digest: Volume 7, Issue 54, message 1 of 3 X-Issue-Reference: v7n34 I have never used Frame, but our Project has been using Publisher for well over a year now. I'm afraid the Chuck Musciano has presented a somewhat lopsided view of the Publisher software. I don't want to start a net-wide argument, but I do want to address some of the comments that were made: chuck@trantor.harris-atd.com (Chuck Musciano) writes: (edited for brevity) >X-Sun-Spots-Digest: Volume 7, Issue 34, message 7 of 12 > >I found Publisher to be a backwards step from Frame. First, it failed >Musciano's Law of New Software: I sat down without the manual and tried to >do something productive. I got nowhere. I too sat down with Publisher without the manual and had little problem getting things done. I guess different people "adapt" to new things differently. Most of our users (> 60) haven't looked at the manuals. >Publisher is not a WYSISYG package. It is a compose/preview package. The present version of Publisher is very nearly WYSIWYG (admittedly previous versions of Publisher were not as good in this regard). It has a special table editor and a special equation editor to simplify putting in those kinds of objects, but everything shows up in the edit window pretty much like its going to look in the final document. I find that you really only have to preview just before printing to check all of the formatting. >The user interface is poor. Commands which do one thing in the compose >window do another in the preview window. For example, I seem to recall >that in compose, you used ^H, ^J, ^K, and ^L to move around (which is bad >enough) but in preview you used B, F, P, and N (backwards, forwards, >previous, and next). I don't want to learn two tools in one! In all of the versions of Publisher we've had, from the beta release to the present one, this has *not* been true. The editor is modeled after EMACS as far as key assignments go, but the key, mouse, and all other definitions are fully configurable by the user if desired. If you don't like ^P, ^N, ^F, & ^B you can change them. >The drawing programs are separate tools. Again, I don't want to learn N >tools, I want to learn one. Does it really matter if the tools are distinct executables or not? Certainly there will be different "command" structures for creating graphics, etc. - are they easier to learn because you don't have to bring up a separate tool to use them? >Overall, Publisher seems targetted to people who know TeX. That may have been true to *some* extent at the start, but it isn't any longer. Publisher makes use of TeX and SGML, but you don't have to know either to use it. Publisher also has the advantage of being able to import and export TeX, LaTeX, and SGML format documents for compatibility with other systems. This is very useful when, for example, you an a collaborator (who uses LaTeX, say) can both work on a paper easily. Publisher also accepts TeX input, so that if you have something unusual to do & know how to do it in TeX, you can do it. >I can insert PostScript into my Frame documents (and do occasionally) to >accomplish the few things that Frame cannot. You can do this in Publisher as well; also Sun bitmaps, TeX code, and PubPaint, and PubDraw objects. >Frame is, I believe, $995/station at educational rates. With the floating >license server, you can actually get away with much less. For example, >suppose, you have 15 stations, but actual use of Maker is about four >simultaneous users. Just buy four licenses, and share them among the 15 >Suns. The license server idea is one which needs to be picked up by other >companies. nI do not know what the Publisher costs, but we have it licensed for half of our 60 workstations - we tend to have a lot of people writing papers. This sounds pretty much like Frame's license server to me. When we were choosing a desktop publishing package, one of the important considerations for our Project was the ease of entering equations. AT THE TIME, Publisher was the only package we found that had a "reasonable" method for entering equations. Things may have changed now, but it remains an important consideration to us. Arbortex, who produce Publisher, have been very responsive to us - both in answering (sometimes stupid) questions, as well as fixing any problems we might encounter. They have also been very responsive to requests/suggestions for additional features. They are really interested in the needs of their customers. I'm quite sure that Arbortext would also be glad to answer questions or send a demo. They can be reached at (313) 996 3566 or FAX (313) 996 3573. DISCLAIMER: I have no connection with Arbortext (who produce the Publisher) other than having used their software for > 1 year now. Dave -- David Bernholdt bernhold@qtp.ufl.edu Quantum Theory Project bernhold@ufpine.bitnet University of Florida Gainesville, FL 32611 904/392 9306