Re: Adobe Certified Newsletter -- notice about FrameMaker

[David Crowe <David.Crowe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Bill;

Beyond what you've mentioned, Preview and OSX PDF generation doesn't 
support annotations, forms, watermarks, multi-file search 
capabilities and many other things. While preview does recognize 
secured files, I have no idea how to produce one.

I produce PDF files with OSX all the time, I only use distiller with 
Classic (i.e. Frame). However, I still rely extensively on Acrobat. 
Preview isn't even close.

- David Crowe


At 3:52 PM -0300 7/19/05, Bill Briggs wrote:
> This is the first time I've heard a reason that actually made sense 
> to me. But Apple PDF generation is pedestrian. Serious users are 
> going to get Acrobat for the job control, the complete support of 
> the PDF specification, scriptability (complete with annoying bugs). 
> I think Adobe may have exaggerated the damage that OS X would do in 
> the Acrobat sales area. I've never made a PDF on OS X by any other 
> means than distillation through Acrobat Distiller. Mind you I still 
> use a Classic version of Distiller too. The sticker price of Acrobat 
> it a bit much, and while I am elegible for academic pricing, I'll 
> sit it out till I really have to upgrade.
>
> - web
>
> At 11:24 AM -0700 7/19/05, Abbas Zaidi wrote:
> > I have done doc development for Apple for a year, and
> > the reasoning I heard from the old timers was a bit
> > less financial.
> >
> > I understood that a big part of the reasoning was
> > Apple's decision to enter the PDF generation market,
> > which takes Adobe away from being the only player in
> > the field.  Adobe is simply punishing Apple by taking
> > away (reworking a relatively underperforming product,
> > i.e.,) Frame from Apple's PDF-native platform (OSX).
> > Would you support a company that, instead of being
> > greatful for your continued loyalty, decides to
> > emulate (and thus infringe upon) your very bread and
> > butter?  Made sense to me when I heard it..
> >
> > It would augur well for Adobe if they came back to the
> > MacTel platform, and made the skip of OSX only a PPC
> > generation skip. That says loads about foresight in
> > picking the right technology to skip.. just by virtue
> > of it having been such a well-timed and astute move..
> >
> > Abbas
> > ================================================
> > Life is for those who can reach out and grab it!
> > http://www.winkinglotus.com/az
> > ================================================
> >
> >
> > --- Allen <soundbyte@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> > >  waynefb@xxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
> > >  > I just really wish there was a good replacement
> > >  for what FrameMaker
> > >  > does, because once the move to Intel chips happens
> > >  next year, it
> > >  > will only be a matter of time before I have to
> > >  replace my computers
> > >  > and then Framemaker is toast as well (at least in
> > >  my book).
> > >
> > >  I'm finding that many of the jobs I'm interviewing
> > >  for want Word. I'm
> > >  starting a short term contract at (big Internet
> > >  company) and they want
> > >  it all in Word. I mentioned the instability of the
> > >  template in Word and
> > >  the response was, "Yeah, but we need it in Word so
> > >  it can be used in
> > >  foreign countries."  I guess they never heard of
> > >  RTF.
> > >
> > >  But if FrameMaker is toast, what is everyone looking
> > >  toward? None of the
> > >  XML based stuff seems really usable. Is it back to
> > >  LaTex?
> >  > Allen
>
> ** To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxx **
> ** with "unsubscribe framers" (no quotes) in the body.   **


** To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxx **
** with "unsubscribe framers" (no quotes) in the body.   **