Comment to new wish list

[_Thomas_Michanek_]

I usually only read these forums through the Newsgroups interface, in which case you don't see any explanation of or introduction to new sub-forums. So I visited the forums' web interface and read the introduction. Here are my comments:

> Welcome to the FrameMaker wish list area. Here, you can make your
> suggestions for improvements and new features to be added to FrameMaker.
>
> Please note that this is a user forum and there is no guarantee that
> anyone from Adobe will read this forum. To make a feature request
> directly to Adobe, please use the company's feature request form at:
> http://www.adobe.com/support/feature.html
>
> Discussions and comments are encouraged. The spirit here is to make
> suggestions to improve the product, not for rants or vents. As such,
> inappropriate messages will be moved or deleted.

If the intention is to simply discuss possible improvements and their
merits with your fellow FM users, fine. But I would guess that many
people posting here would assume that this is a forum for getting feature
requests sent to Adobe, directly or indirectly. Especially if you don't
use the web interface or don't read the introduction quoted above.

In that case, I have posted my opinion on such postings in the previous
"wish list" thread, and I won't repeat it here again. I just encourage
the forum hosts and other forum participants to keep an eye of the
postings here and make clear that this is a user-to-user discussion
forum, nothing more (if that's the intention).

If the forum hosts intend to actually collect and summarize these
postings to Adobe R&D or product management, please make that clear.
I really think this affects the type of "requests" to post here, and the
spirit of the following discussions. In my opinion, it may be hard to
combine a true "feature request forum" and a more free "discussion of
merit forum" into something truly useful.

--
/Thomas Michanek
FM user since 1990

[Arnis_Gubins]

Thomas,

>I usually only read these forums through the Newsgroups interface, in which case you don't see any explanation of or introduction to new sub-forums. So I visited the forums' web interface and read the introduction. Here are my comments:

Unfortunately, the forum software doesn't send the forum description
through the nntp: channel.

I am aware of your sentiments on the "Feature request" issue, and I do
make the marketing and product management and support folks at Adobe
aware of these forums at every opportunity.

Adobe already has a direct route for feature requests (as indicated in
the forum description) for all products. Any of the Adobe product
"Feature Request" forums are in the same spirit as this one - it's
just that some Forums have more active participation of Adobe
employees (on their own time), but that doesn't mean that nobody from
the FM team will read these postings. One can hope that some ideas
here will strike a chord and be acted upon.

Please also don't discount the various plug-in and script developers
that may pick up and run with any of the ideas presented here to
provide all of us with something to enhance the product or our
workflows.

All I hope for is that we can make the best of the opportunities that
are presented to us.

Arnis Gubins
Forum host

[_Aseem_Dokania_]

We do look at the forum posts from time to time. More so during product planning phases. The inputs received on the forums is a valuable source of information for us.

We also try to have direct communication with experienced FrameMaker users. We are currently in the planning phase for the future versions of FrameMaker. We would really appreciate if FrameMaker users can take out some time to share their ideas and wishlist with us.

We would prefer to receive a prioritised list of 5 to 10 features (not more than 10). And also a short description for each feature. Based on your requests we might want to schedule a call and discuss your ideas. Some information about yourself and your organisation would help us see your requests in the correct perspective. You can post your list of prioritised features on this forum, or send it to me directly (aseem@adobe.com). I understand that many of you have posted multiple requests in the past. It would be helpful if you resend your prioritised wishlist.

Thank you for your continued support.

Aseem Dokania

Product Manager - FrameMaker

[_Paul_Findon_]

Hi Aseem,

Here's my wish list for FrameMaker:

1) Mac OS X version.
2) Mac OS X version.
3) Mac OS X version.
4) Mac OS X version.
5) Mac OS X version.
6) Mac OS X version.
7) Mac OS X version.
8) Mac OS X version.
9) Mac OS X version.
10) Mac OS X version.

I limited it to the 10 most important features for me.

Paul

[_Dennis_Brunnenmeyer_]

Aseem...

It's natural that you would seek the advice of FrameMaker experts when mapping the future of FrameMaker. It's entirely unnatural to ignore or at least fail to tackle the basic faults of Frame that take up so much space in this forum.

I fear that gold-plating a rusty hull will sink this ship. Is there any hope at all that the FrameMaker development team will recode this application from the ground up, making it more intuitive to use, with an eye to attracting more new users?

[Guest]

Dennis, et al:

Stand-alone authoring environments, especially proprietary ones, aren't quite a dime a dozen, but they're close...

Given the advances in software since the mid-1980s, and especially given the advances in open-source software since the mid-1980s, and given the generally unresponsive nature of the bloated, top-down, closed-source model for software development, my biggest wish is for an open-source replacement.

For me, my ideal next-generation technical writing tool would begin with content management and only then add the necessary authoring capabilities...

Cheers & hope this helps,
Riley

[_Chris_Scheck_]

Hi there,

Why are you people being so stubborn? There is no replacement for FrameMaker. We'd gladly take version 6 if it ran on Mac OS X. But 8 would be nice too.
The important thing is Mac OS X. Your InDesign things just don't cut it.

Cheers,
Chris

[_David_Blyth_San_Diego_]

1) Full XML schema support
2) Mac OS X
3) Better application development environment
4) Better application documentation.