[Scribus] Scribus vs Framemaker

kholish nurkholish
Mon Feb 4 14:00:52 CET 2008

Hedley Finger wrote:
> Kholish:
> At Sunday, 3/02/2008, 12:55 AM;, you wrote:
>>I am new ti scribus. I want to know...
>>Is scribus features same with Framemaker ?
> I have used FrameMaker since v. 3.0 was released simultaneously on 
> Windows, UNIX, and Macintosh, and have used it on all those 
> platforms, including Sun OpenLook and HP-UX.
> It is optimised for producing books where the layout is more or less 
> the same from page to page (except for the obvious exceptions such as 
> chapter title pages, index pages, frontmatter, etc.).  If I was 
> writing a traditional book (manual, fiction, non-fiction) I would use 
> FrameMaker for its comprehensive layout, TOC, LOF, LOT, Index, 
> cross-referencing, etc. capabilities.  It has the best table editor 
> in the business bar none, and has a limited ability to float graphics 
> and tables, i.e. if it won't fit on current page it is moved to the next.
> *Everything* in FrameMaker is a named style/format, from 
> cross-references, pages, colours, tables, and is able to generate 
> many reports and lists for managing a project.  It can also be 
> interfaced to content management systems.  But its colour handling 
> and profile management is weak but adequate for its purpose.  It has 
> the handy ability to assemble the  components of a TOC or Index and 
> format them in any way you wish.  It also has conditions that allow 
> you to selectively hide or reveal content, ideal when there are 
> product variants for different markets, etc.
> FrameMaker did not support Unicode until the most recent release (v. 
> 8.0) and releases do not bring any radical updates and are rather 
> expensive.  Another thing that sets it apart is its support for 
> structured documentation (read SGML and XML).  It has an extremely 
> good structure editor.  Unfortunately, because any given schema 
> (Docbook, TEI, DITA) has to be mapped onto its native structure 
> particularly for tables, a good deal of customisation and 
> configuration via XSLT, read/write rules and sometimes C plug-ins may 
> need to be done to ensure painless roundtripping to/from XML/SGML.
> If I were doing a layout intensive publication where every page is 
> different (think newspaper, brochure, magazine, annual report), I 
> would use Scribus, particularly if there were many graphics, and TOC, 
> etc. was not needed.  If I were doing a manual with simple graphics 
> and   a TOC, Index, etc. I would use FrameMaker.
> Regards,
> Hedley
> --
> Hedley Stewart Finger
> 28 Regent Street   Camberwell VIC 3124   Australia
> Tel. +61 3 9809 1229   Mobile +61 412 461 558,
> E-mail <mailto:hfinger at handholding.com.au>
> _______________________________________________
> Scribus mailing list
> Scribus at nashi.altmuehlnet.de
> http://nashi.altmuehlnet.de/mailman/listinfo/scribus


Thanks for all the comments....:-)
Basically, I want to create a book with maybe 100 - 200 pages. So the best
software for it is Framemaker, isn`t it ?



View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Scribus-vs-Framemaker-tp15243082p15267606.html
Sent from the Scribus mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

More information about the scribus mailing list