Do you think FM 7.1 will really be updated

[vnhjvnj]

All in the subject, we hope but no news.

[l***@nospam.net]

Post by vnhjvnj
All in the subject, we hope but no news.

Framemaker is a mature product. It has been since version 5. New
development was pretty much stopped when Adobe bought Frame. They did
take Framebuilder and make it part of Framemaker -- and I don't know if
that was good or bad -- but except for bugs fixes, there hasn't been much
new in what, 7 or 8 years?

I think sales are still driven by the enterprise customer market, and if
they are not asking for new development and willing to pay for it, there
won't be much more then more bug fixes, and changes to meet the ever
changing moving target-monopoly practices of Micro$oft.

During this same time period, there has also been the
de-professionalization of writing tasks in the business world. Managers
think anyone with a computer and MS word can write and nothing more is
needed. They also think Frame is a fancy version of MS Word and nothing
else is needed. Thus, there only a limited market for Frame. It will
remain so, because M$ has a monopoly blessed by the republicans.

[Christoph Nahr]

Oh, I'm sure there will be an update... the only question is, will the
list of new features include anything besides new MS Word filters?

[Thomas Michanek]

I have it from one of the people in the Beta test program that
the next version of FM will be called 7.2, not 7.5 or 8.0.
I thought that sounded odd, but that's the info he was given.

[l***@nospam.net]

I have it from one of the people in the Beta test program that the next
version of FM will be called 7.2, not 7.5 or 8.0. I thought that sounded
odd, but that's the info he was given.

It means its a point release. Bug fixes if your lucky, and just a enough
feature change to call for billing the customers a few hundred for the
version-- but still lacking the things people have been asking for 10
years that would make it a major release.

[Viktor Haag]

Post by l***@nospam.net

I have it from one of the people in the Beta test program that the next
version of FM will be called 7.2, not 7.5 or 8.0. I thought that sounded
odd, but that's the info he was given.

It means its a point release. Bug fixes if your lucky, and just a enough
feature change to call for billing the customers a few hundred for the
version-- but still lacking the things people have been asking for 10
years that would make it a major release.

And, with luck, still backwards compatible with version 7.0,
since I'm still hoping to make good use of my Macintosh version...

[Tim Murray]

Post by l***@nospam.net

I have it from one of the people in the Beta test program that the next
version of FM will be called 7.2, not 7.5 or 8.0. I thought that sounded
odd, but that's the info he was given.

It means its a point release. Bug fixes if your lucky, and just a enough
feature change to call for billing the customers a few hundred for the
version-- but still lacking the things people have been asking for 10
years that would make it a major release.

That would be the case even if it were called 8.0.

[l***@nospam.net]

In <***@newsgroups.bellsouth.net>, on
07/31/2005

Post by Tim Murray

Post by l***@nospam.net

I have it from one of the people in the Beta test program that the next
version of FM will be called 7.2, not 7.5 or 8.0. I thought that sounded
odd, but that's the info he was given.

It means its a point release. Bug fixes if your lucky, and just a enough
feature change to call for billing the customers a few hundred for the
version-- but still lacking the things people have been asking for 10
years that would make it a major release.

That would be the case even if it were called 8.0.

Have you ever worked in a major software shop?

[Christoph Nahr]

Post by l***@nospam.net
07/31/2005

Post by Tim Murray
That would be the case even if it were called 8.0.

Have you ever worked in a major software shop?

Have you ever bought a FrameMaker update? Like, 7.0?

Tim is absolutely correct... Adobe wouldn't hesitate to produce
another minimal point release and call it 8.0.

[Neil Gould]

Post by Christoph Nahr

Post by l***@nospam.net
07/31/2005

Post by Tim Murray
That would be the case even if it were called 8.0.

Have you ever worked in a major software shop?

Have you ever bought a FrameMaker update? Like, 7.0?
Tim is absolutely correct... Adobe wouldn't hesitate to produce
another minimal point release and call it 8.0.

So... integrating FM and FM+SGML into a single product is a "minimal point
release"? ;-)

I got into FM somewhat late in its developement; v3, just before Adobe
bought Frame, Inc. However, it seems to me that every whole-number release
added something "major" to FM's functionality. FM's developement path is
evolutionary instead of revolutionary, and doesn't address some of the
problems that have plagued FM from its early days. However, all things
considered, it is still a solid product when compared to the alternative.

Regards,

[l***@nospam.net]

Post by Christoph Nahr

Post by l***@nospam.net
07/31/2005

Post by Tim Murray
That would be the case even if it were called 8.0.

Have you ever worked in a major software shop?

Have you ever bought a FrameMaker update? Like, 7.0?
Tim is absolutely correct... Adobe wouldn't hesitate to produce another
minimal point release and call it 8.0.

Name a Frame release with nothing but minor bug fixes and changes?

And yes I've used Frame since sometime in the early 90s. I've been a beta
tester for them before it was owned by Adobe.

And try to stop the whining.

[Christoph Nahr]

Post by l***@nospam.net
Name a Frame release with nothing but minor bug fixes and changes?

Huh? Every single one since Adobe bought Frame -- although Neil is of
course correct that the integration of Structured FM in the base
product was significant for those who didn't already own it.

Post by l***@nospam.net
And yes I've used Frame since sometime in the early 90s. I've been a beta
tester for them before it was owned by Adobe.

I've used FrameMaker since before the buyout, too. I recall you could
e-mail the Frame folks and a real developer would address any issues
you brought up, point by point. Those were the days...

Post by l***@nospam.net
And try to stop the whining.

Is this childish outburst supposed to impress anyone?

Since you said you beta-tested Frame, may we assume that you are an
Adobe employee now and that this is their official attitude towards
their customers? Wouldn't surprise me...

[l***@nospam.net]

Post by Christoph Nahr

Post by l***@nospam.net
Name a Frame release with nothing but minor bug fixes and changes?

Huh? Every single one since Adobe bought Frame -- although Neil is of
course correct that the integration of Structured FM in the base product
was significant for those who didn't already own it.

Then your complaint is? Maybe you think it was Adobe's job to do more to
please you since you had the other product?

Post by Christoph Nahr

Post by l***@nospam.net
And yes I've used Frame since sometime in the early 90s. I've been a beta
tester for them before it was owned by Adobe.

I've used FrameMaker since before the buyout, too. I recall you could
e-mail the Frame folks and a real developer would address any issues you
brought up, point by point. Those were the days...

Times change. Deal with it.

Post by Christoph Nahr

Post by l***@nospam.net
And try to stop the whining.

Is this childish outburst supposed to impress anyone?

You're the one with the whine.

Post by Christoph Nahr
Since you said you beta-tested Frame, may we assume that you are an Adobe
employee now and that this is their official attitude towards their
customers? Wouldn't surprise me...

Nope. Never worked for Frame or Adobe. Stop reading things that are not
written. They used me as a beta tester because I asked, and had years of
experience with structured documents and their creation, production and
editing.

Framemaker is a mature product. There isn't a lot that is ever going to
be added to it. Its been this way for 10 years now. Its probably not
ever going to change. Not accepting that is your choice -- but at some
point you have to deal with reality.

[Tim Murray]

Post by l***@nospam.net

Post by Tim Murray

Post by l***@nospam.net
It means its a point release. Bug fixes if your lucky, and just a enough
feature change to call for billing the customers a few hundred for the
version-- but still lacking the things people have been asking for 10
years that would make it a major release.

That would be the case even if it were called 8.0.

Have you ever worked in a major software shop?

Um, no.

I've been using Frame since 3 and beta tested most others since then. Other
than 5 to 6, when they introduced the $chapnum and $volnum variables which I
find extremely valuable, I have not been wowed by the changes. I'm not a
heavy XML, SGML, or structured user, so I've been waiting for the core
elements to be addressed.

I wrote a wish-list and posted it to my Web site in version 5. Since then,
I've been able to remove not a single item.

[Neil Gould]

Post by Tim Murray
I've been using Frame since 3 and beta tested most others since then.
Other than 5 to 6, when they introduced the $chapnum and $volnum
variables which I find extremely valuable, I have not been wowed by
the changes. I'm not a heavy XML, SGML, or structured user, so I've
been waiting for the core elements to be addressed.

It seems to me that every full-number release added important
functionality to Frame. I don't recall all of them at this point, but to
name a few; CMYK color support was added in 4; book features were added in
5 (I think?), and improved in 6, along with better support for external
graphics formats; structured document support added in 7 along with
further improvements in book and graphics features. All in all, not bad,
and I'm certainly glad that Frame has avoided the "shuffling menu
upgrades" that accompany most of Adobe's upgrades.

Regards,