Next Framemaker release

Posted:
in Mac Software edited January 2014
G'day folks:



Just in case anyone here is interested in Framemaker but isn't already subscribed to frameusers, here's the poop from Adobe about the next version of Framemaker:



--------------

- There is no specific date of an announcement, actual release of a

new version or pricing available



- next FM release will import NATIVE Photoshop & Illustrator graphics



- SVG handling in FM is improved (apparently will still display as a

rasterized image in FM, but will preserve vector data output to XML

(and acrobat? -that's my personal speculation NOT Karl's information)



- opening an XML file (.xml) in Frame, editing, then saving will

default to .xml format not .fm binary file format



- in general, XML features will be improved, but no full Unicode support



---------------



(I'm not the author of these comments, just passing them on, BTW.)



I'll reserve judgement for now about the worth of these new features. On the face of it they seem to be far from compelling: perhaps I'll think differently when I see the actual implementation.
«13

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 60
    moogsmoogs Posts: 4,296member
    My understanding is, FrameMaker is dead. Their publishing will be focused on InDesign from now on, bringing in more and more long-document-specific features, so that FM users will have some options going forward.



    Other Adobe products that are going nowhere (at least on our platform):



    Atmospheres

    Premiere

    LiveMotion



    Maybe even After Effects, given Apple's work with Shake. Although they're in different ballparks in many respects.
  • Reply 2 of 60
    cowerdcowerd Posts: 579member
    Quote:

    bringing in more and more long-document-specific features



    Its going to take more than some long document features to give FM users an option. Conditional text, robust indexing, TOC for text and figures, flexible handling of footnotes and endnotes aren't even close to appearing in InDesign.
  • Reply 3 of 60
    resres Posts: 711member
    The only reason that I still have classic installed on my Macs is Frame Maker. No other program comes close to having the long document creation features. Unfortunately Adobe wants to kill it (I thank that's why they bought it).



    If I had a lot of money, I'd buy FM from Adobe and give it the treatment and updating it deserves.
  • Reply 4 of 60
    jlljll Posts: 2,709member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Moogs

    My understanding is, FrameMaker is dead. Their publishing will be focused on InDesign from now on, bringing in more and more long-document-specific features, so that FM users will have some options going forward.



    Other Adobe products that are going nowhere (at least on our platform):



    Atmospheres

    Premiere

    LiveMotion



    Maybe even After Effects, given Apple's work with Shake. Although they're in different ballparks in many respects.




    FrameMaker isn't dead - they are currently working on a new version.



    We use FrameMaker for database publishing with our own grown app that sits in the middle of FM and an Oracle database.



    No other app can do what FM can, but I wouldn't mind if they made all this possible in InDesign.
  • Reply 5 of 60
    foadfoad Posts: 697member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Moogs

    My understanding is, FrameMaker is dead. Their publishing will be focused on InDesign from now on, bringing in more and more long-document-specific features, so that FM users will have some options going forward.



    Other Adobe products that are going nowhere (at least on our platform):



    Atmospheres

    Premiere

    LiveMotion



    Maybe even After Effects, given Apple's work with Shake. Although they're in different ballparks in many respects.




    From what I know FM isn't dead. I personally don't use so it isn't much interest to me. This is for the rest of the apps.



    Atmosphere...don't care about it. I don't see it as a good enough contender to Shockwave. I see that as its main competition, someone correct me if I am wrong.



    Premiere...I use FCP and anyone in their right mind would too. Adove prorpietary DV format is crap. They were stupid and made a Windows MEdia dependent application that blows. It can't even load a freakin quicktime from what I hear. Most of the post industry lives off of QT and for them to not even import it is rediculous.



    LiveMotion...is dead. This is according to Adobe'sexecutive VP of worldwide products in a interview in Digit Issue 067. He said he doesn't see a future for it. That is his way of saying it is dead without saying it's dead.
  • Reply 6 of 60
    othelloothello Posts: 1,053member
    i know i've said this before, but from what i have heard within adobe frame is *not* dead.



    it just lacks resources sometimes because it doesn't have the glamour of photoshop et al.



    these new features are in line with what i've heard, but the lack of full unicode support in xml is shockingly bad. especially as they have given support to native xml files. very poor IMHO.



    i am still hearing its going to be carbon (the next version of frame i mean). frame is the only app i still open classic for...
  • Reply 7 of 60
    smirclesmircle Posts: 1,035member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by boy_analog



    - in general, XML features will be improved, but no full Unicode support




    This stinks big time.



    Framemaker is treated so poorly by Adobe, it's a shame, because it is a truely fine application.
  • Reply 8 of 60
    othelloothello Posts: 1,053member
    here here!
  • Reply 9 of 60
    By the way, I should clarify when I say that the remarks in my earlier post are from Adobe: they were relayed from an Adobe presentation at the frameusers conference. So I'm relying on the veracity of the original correspondent's views.



    Another person who was at this same presentation has since chimed in (on the frameusers list) with his own interpretation ... please take the following remarks with a big dose of salt:





    -------------------



    As for what Lester noted Karl (FrameMaker's P.M.) had

    said, I would add the following:



    [snip]



    4) PageMaker and Quark import will be added.



    5) Apparently, there are some bug fixes that were not

    listed.



    Am not looking at my notes right now, I might have

    missed an item or two.



    Now, what was not said but that seemed clear to me,

    based on MY PERSONAL INTERPRETATIONS and OBSERVATIONS.



    1) Mac users need to go to plan B. Karl said he was

    forbidden from making announcements about OSes, but I

    sense the time has come for a petition--Windows users,

    you too can benefit from having Mac OSX supported

    because it expands your ability to share content!

    However, I now personally do not expect an OSX-native

    version of FrameMaker .... Remember, nobody "said"

    that, this is "my take."



    2) I did not hear Unicode mentioned (nor did I ask

    about it). Since it was clear that the upcoming

    release would be incremental, I personally do not

    expect unicode.



    3) I don't need multiple undo in FrameMaker--I work

    with designers to test designs and the program is not

    unstable enough to require multiple undos--and, I care

    about not increasing the resource needs for FrameMaker

    and I care about not slowing FrameMaker down. But, for

    those of you who do care about multiple undo, it was

    not mentioned at all by anyone. I personally would not

    expect it.



    Please note, the preceding three items are my guesses

    based on what I interpreted ... these three items are

    not at all factual or based on fact. I might be wrong

    on all three counts, and would be happy to be wrong on

    at least two.





    -------------------



    I haven't met either of these respondents, but the first one seemed more cogent to me. All the same, you should be aware that there is a conflicting report about the unicode implementation.



    Moreover, I find the suggestion that Adobe might be EOLing Mac Frame to be quite incredible. Since Frame already has a strong Unix presence, one would think that Adobe would be able to effect a substantial unification of the Mac & Unix code trees, and thereby cutting costs substantially. I can only think that if Adobe was planning to cut Frame on the Mac, it must be planning to do the same to other unix flavours.



    And I would be astonished if Frame were to become a windows-only product. Its cross-platform presence is a major part of its appeal: reducing the number of platforms available for Frame would be a huge shot in the arm for its competitors.
  • Reply 10 of 60
    jlljll Posts: 2,709member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by boy_analog

    Moreover, I find the suggestion that Adobe might be EOLing Mac Frame to be quite incredible. Since Frame already has a strong Unix presence, one would think that Adobe would be able to effect a substantial unification of the Mac & Unix code trees, and thereby cutting costs substantially. I can only think that if Adobe was planning to cut Frame on the Mac, it must be planning to do the same to other unix flavours.



    The last thing I heard from a contact at Adobe was that they are still making the Mac version.



    But since FM isn't that Mac like (it has plenty of Unix shortcuts), they could perhaps release an X11 version for Panther? Would that be a terrible thing?
  • Reply 11 of 60
    Quote:

    Originally posted by JLL

    The last thing I heard from a contact at Adobe was that they are still making the Mac version.



    But since FM isn't that Mac like (it has plenty of Unix shortcuts), they could perhaps release an X11 version for Panther? Would that be a terrible thing?




    I haven't played with X11 on the Mac, so I can't comment on how robust it is. But you're certainly right about Frame not being particularly Mac-like.



    I would imagine that the biggest gripes about such a strategy would come from people that have invested substantially in Applescripting Frame. I don't know if there's stuff that Applescript can do that fmbatch can't, or vice versa.
  • Reply 12 of 60
    othelloothello Posts: 1,053member
    i've used the Unix version of frame, and the problem with it was...



    ...fonts



    hence the place where i work sticking with windows and mac licences.



    i remember we tested a vast government reportwe were on the unix version once. the windows version very very slow handling the files (and they were split in a book into multiple, multiple sub files). the mac version wouldn't even run it properly. the unix version just whizzed through it.



    so a os x native version would rule.



    and i can't believe adobe would bin it (and i knwo they are not going to at the moment), especially the corporate clients who buy server licences and corporate licences (especially software publishers)
  • Reply 13 of 60
    Quark, Pagemaker, InDesign, Word and any other DTP or wordprocessor doesn't even come close to Framemaker on technical report or long document writing. If you notice, every manual, or book out there in pdf was made with Framemaker.

    Framemaker marries document processing with DTP precision typography. If your document is more than 100 pages and you want typographic control, you better use it.

    Apple, Sun, Oracle etc... all use it, they must know something. The alternative is Latex, good but not very user friendly :-(
  • Reply 14 of 60
    othelloothello Posts: 1,053member
    Gamicoulas : but it does lack certain detailed typographic controls, which has made it not an option for large book publishers. one of the university presses in the uk evaluated it a few years ago as a replacement to them setting everything in quark. but the killer was specific lack of detailed typographic control...
  • Reply 15 of 60
    That's an interesting little tidbit there, Othello. Learning of the typographic limitations of the Frame engine only reinforces my belief that Adobe's long term plan is to recreate Frame's functionality by developing a next-gen bundle based around the ID engine.



    More generally, everyone seems to think that the future of documentation is spelt X-M-L. A really big player in the XML doco sphere is arbortext, who unfortunately don't support the Mac. Nor do Corel, who have bought XMetal. (Great name, BTW.)



    But there's a really promising newcomer from Korea (of all places), developing a next-gen modular XML-based publishing system for OSX: softmagic. So I'm really not losing any sleep about the future of tech publishing on the Mac!
  • Reply 16 of 60
    othelloothello Posts: 1,053member
    note *no* mac support...







    Quote:

    ( BW)(CA-ADOBE-SYSTEMS)(ADBE) New Version of Adobe FrameMaker Extends

    Powerful XML Capabilities



    Business Editors/High-Tech Writers



    SAN JOSE, Calif.--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Dec. 1, 2003--



    Upgrade Includes New Migration, Import Features and Support for

    Popular Graphics Formats to Capitalize on Existing Assets



    Adobe Systems Incorporated (Nasdaq:ADBE) today announced Adobe(R)

    FrameMaker(R) 7.1, an upgrade to its award winning, enterprise-class

    authoring and publishing solution. FrameMaker combines the simplicity

    of word processing with the power of Extensible Markup Language (XML),

    making it easier to repurpose content and publish to multiple

    channels, including print, Adobe Portable Document Format (PDF) and

    the Web.

    FrameMaker 7.1 includes new features for cross-referencing between

    documents and allows multiple variations of a document to be stored as

    a single file. With FrameMaker 7.1 users can now migrate legacy

    technical documents and assets from Quark XPress and Adobe

    PageMaker(R) formats, while expanded support for popular graphics file

    formats means Adobe Photoshop(R) files can be imported directly into

    FrameMaker, saving valuable time.



    Making XML Easier to Use



    FrameMaker gives corporate users the ability to easily create,

    edit and import valid XML content in full WYSIWYG (What You See Is

    What You Get) mode when authoring documents. FrameMaker 7.1 introduces

    conditional text support for XML to allow multiple variations of an

    XML document to be stored in a single file. This greatly streamlines

    the production of documentation with subtle content variations, such

    as region-specific information for different electrical requirements

    or warranty and customer service details.

    FrameMaker 7.1 extends its cross-referencing features to allow

    links between XML documents. For example, a product installation guide

    in XML can now reference and provide a direct link to a specific

    section in a user manual that is also in XML format. Based on user

    feedback, an automatic save to XML feature was added so that users

    don't have to remember to select a special "save as" function when

    editing XML documents -- a simple save or file close will

    automatically save the document to the correct format.

    "FrameMaker's support for open standards such as XML is testament

    to Adobe's leadership in the technical information space," said Stefan

    Wess, chief technical officer for empolis. "We've integrated

    FrameMaker with sigmalink, our content lifecycle management system, to

    make it easy and quick for structured content to be managed and

    re-used across multiple documents and delivery platforms, such as user

    and training manuals both on the Web and in paper format. This results

    in a rapid return on the investment in structured information."



    Additional Enhancements



    New filters enable PageMaker and Quark XPress files to be easily

    migrated into FrameMaker. Users with legacy files in these formats can

    now take advantage of FrameMaker's superior long document handling and

    multi-channel support to publish directly to print, Adobe PDF, HTML,

    XML and other formats.

    Corporate publishers can work more efficiently by importing

    Photoshop files directly into FrameMaker 7.1, eliminating the need to

    save files to an intermediate format. Other additions include support

    for the JPEG 2000 graphics format and improved filters for handling

    artwork in Adobe PDF, including native files from Adobe

    Illustrator(R). Expanded support for Scalable Vector Graphics (SVG)

    means a single graphics file can be the source for both high quality

    vector graphics in print and PDF as well as an interactive, high

    quality vector graphic on the Web.



    Pricing and Availability



    Adobe FrameMaker 7.1 for Windows and Sun(R) Solaris(TM) will be

    available in January 2004 in the United States, Europe and Canada at

    the Adobe store at www.adobe.com. FrameMaker 7.1, desktop version, for

    Microsoft(R) Windows(R) has an estimated street price of US$799 for

    the full version and $199 for the upgrade. On Sun Solaris, the full

    version has an estimated street price of $1,329 and $279 for the

    upgrade. For more detailed information about new features and upgrade

    policies for Adobe FrameMaker, please visit:

    www.adobe.com/products/framemaker.



    About Adobe Systems Incorporated



    Adobe helps people and businesses communicate better through its

    world-leading digital imaging, design and document technology

    platforms for consumers, creative professionals and enterprises.

    Adobe's revenue in the last fiscal year exceeded $1 billion. For more

    information about Adobe, visit www.adobe.com.



    Adobe, the Adobe logo, FrameMaker, Illustrator, PageMaker and

    Photoshop are either registered trademarks or trademarks of Adobe

    Systems Incorporated in the United States and/or other countries. SVG

    is a trademark of the World Wide Web Consortium; marks of the W3C are

    registered and held by its host institutions MIT, INRIA and Keio.

    Microsoft and Windows are ether registered trademarks or trademarks of

    Microsoft Corporation in the United States and/or other countries. Sun

    and Solaris are trademarks or registered trademarks of Sun

    Microsystems, Inc. in the United States and other countries. All other

    trademarks are the property of their respective owners.



  • Reply 17 of 60
    Quote:

    Originally posted by othello

    note *no* mac support...







    Not happy!



    The frameusers list has gone berzerk about this, and the Adobe reps are keeping their lips tightly shut about the future of Frame on the Mac.



    Adobe rep:



    Quote:

    Adobe is fully committed to ongoing development and enhancement of

    Macintosh versions of all products in the "Adobe Creative Professional Suite."



    Frame user query:



    Quote:

    Should I, reading between the lines, interpret your response as "Adobe is

    fully committed to stop ongoing development and enhancement of Macintosh

    versions of all products except the "Adobe Creative Professional Suite"?



    Adobe rep:



    Quote:

    No! I was responding DIRECTLY to the question posed about the future

    of Macintosh support for Photoshop, Illustrator, InDesign, GoLive, and

    Acrobat, nothing more and nothing less! Please don't read anything

    "between the lines" ...







    Make of that what you will....



  • Reply 18 of 60
    rokrok Posts: 3,519member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by boy_analog

    Make of that what you will....







    well, yeah, he doesn't want to be nailed as the guy who started the rumors that frame for mac is dead (though if it doesn't end in "cs" these days, it might very well be).
  • Reply 19 of 60
    Call me naively optimistic, but I don't believe that Adobe is entirely abandoning the Mac tech-doc market. Though I'm far from happy about Adobe's behaviour, I do recall that they had the decency to tell the linux folk that they were definitely not going to go ahead with a linux version of Frame. So I would think that if they were terminating Mac development of Framemaker and/or any equivalent applications, they'd at least say so.



    So let's sketch some optimistic scenarios, and see which ones make the most sense.



    1. Frame 8 will support OSX natively, and include all of 7.1's features and more; or



    2. Frame users will be pushed towards a new version of InDesign that includes various long-doc enhancements, and Mac users might get pushed a little more brusquely than their Windoze or Solaris using brethren.



    Regarding this second scenario, if memory serves then Pagemaker was continued on Windoze for some time after the Mac version was terminated. If so, then perhaps Adobe is following a similar pattern with Frame.
  • Reply 20 of 60
    othelloothello Posts: 1,053member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by boy_analog





    1. Frame 8 will support OSX natively, and include all of 7.1's features and more; or





    while i would love this to happen, i just can't see it...



    what is going to screw things up is if you work in a mixed platform environment (as i do). do you upgrade to 7.1 on the pcs (we do a lot of xml work, so 7.1 appeals a lot), but then have mac versions of 7 that can't deal with the new files?



    ggggrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr
Sign In or Register to comment.