What are the chances? It will be the only app for me that will stop me buying an Intel Mac because it requires classic.
Please may it happen!
As much as I want to see FrameMaker for the Mac restored, the answer to your question is "No." Adobe's handling of FrameMaker makes me want to beat the company with a nail-embedded club. Its decision to kill FM for the Mac had nothing to do with the processor. Exactly why did it kill FM for the Mac? I don't know. I don't buy the marketshare argument because FM still runs on Unix, a much smaller market. It runs on Windows where publishing is a very low priority. Why abandon FM for the Mac without a migration path. [Heck, it gave PageMaker users a migration path!] We are left to speculate. In the meantime, I will continue to pound nails into my club.
considering that frame is still used by many large companies producing manuals, documentation etc, and the high license cost (not counting Frame server £££), you would have thought that adobe would have kept it alive.
what was even more of a surprise was the news i heard from my sources in adobe that they had a carbon version ready to go...
Why don't you just install XP on the Macintel and run Framemaker from there?
[hmurchison: this is not at all to knock your suggestion]
i can imagine the situation...
working in os x. have to do some amends to a frame doc, so i boot out of os x and into xp. struggle with font management, postscript generation etc. save file. boot back into os x. email off proof. get a phone call with amends. boot back into xp...
unless i don't get how dual booting works it would be a nightmare
working in os x. have to do some amends to a frame doc, so i boot out of os x and into xp. struggle with font management, postscript generation etc. save file. boot back into os x. email off proof. get a phone call with amends. boot back into xp...
Exactly. This is why people who do real work cannot afford to dual-boot; you'd spend all your time booting instead of working.
Exactly. This is why people who do real work cannot afford to dual-boot; you'd spend all your time booting instead of working.
But VMware is the solution.
Well, 'real work' isn't a good descriptor. As long as you only need to boot into Windows for a few programs that you don't use often (Or if you have to boot into Windows for certain tasks), it would work fine. For example, if you did all your video editing in OS X but had to boot into Windows to use some crazy GraphEdit magic or DirectShow filter to get the encoding done that you need. You wouldn't be booting back and forth, just booting for the encoding job once the editing was complete. There are other cool Windows programs like Noise Ninja (I'm no photo pro so I don't know if there are OS X equivalents) that you could boot into Windows to run through a batch job on all your photos. It wouldn't be something that you would be booting back and forth for.
Comments
Originally posted by othello
What are the chances? It will be the only app for me that will stop me buying an Intel Mac because it requires classic.
Please may it happen!
As much as I want to see FrameMaker for the Mac restored, the answer to your question is "No." Adobe's handling of FrameMaker makes me want to beat the company with a nail-embedded club. Its decision to kill FM for the Mac had nothing to do with the processor. Exactly why did it kill FM for the Mac? I don't know. I don't buy the marketshare argument because FM still runs on Unix, a much smaller market. It runs on Windows where publishing is a very low priority. Why abandon FM for the Mac without a migration path. [Heck, it gave PageMaker users a migration path!] We are left to speculate. In the meantime, I will continue to pound nails into my club.
considering that frame is still used by many large companies producing manuals, documentation etc, and the high license cost (not counting Frame server £££), you would have thought that adobe would have kept it alive.
what was even more of a surprise was the news i heard from my sources in adobe that they had a carbon version ready to go...
a WASTE of a wonderful application IMHO
Originally posted by hmurchison
Why don't you just install XP on the Macintel and run Framemaker from there?
[hmurchison: this is not at all to knock your suggestion]
i can imagine the situation...
working in os x. have to do some amends to a frame doc, so i boot out of os x and into xp. struggle with font management, postscript generation etc. save file. boot back into os x. email off proof. get a phone call with amends. boot back into xp...
unless i don't get how dual booting works it would be a nightmare
Originally posted by othello
What are the chances? It will be the only app for me that will stop me buying an Intel Mac because it requires classic.
Please may it happen!
FrameMaker is on maintenance on other platforms than Mac, and that means that unless some big client finds a bug, it won't be updated anymore.
FrameMaker is basically dead on all platforms.
if frame is dead then it is a huge waste. it is an incredible app -- yes it has its faults and an awful UI, but the power!
but then i expect to see InDesign CS 3 onwards start to have more and more frame features...
Originally posted by othello
are you sure that is true? i have heard about some things (improved XML in/out etc) that would only come in a new release?
That's what two Adobe guys told me.
Originally posted by othello
working in os x. have to do some amends to a frame doc, so i boot out of os x and into xp. struggle with font management, postscript generation etc. save file. boot back into os x. email off proof. get a phone call with amends. boot back into xp...
Exactly. This is why people who do real work cannot afford to dual-boot; you'd spend all your time booting instead of working.
But VMware is the solution.
Originally posted by wmf
Exactly. This is why people who do real work cannot afford to dual-boot; you'd spend all your time booting instead of working.
But VMware is the solution.
Well, 'real work' isn't a good descriptor. As long as you only need to boot into Windows for a few programs that you don't use often (Or if you have to boot into Windows for certain tasks), it would work fine. For example, if you did all your video editing in OS X but had to boot into Windows to use some crazy GraphEdit magic or DirectShow filter to get the encoding done that you need. You wouldn't be booting back and forth, just booting for the encoding job once the editing was complete. There are other cool Windows programs like Noise Ninja (I'm no photo pro so I don't know if there are OS X equivalents) that you could boot into Windows to run through a batch job on all your photos. It wouldn't be something that you would be booting back and forth for.