Flare vs Frame

[Combs, Richard]

Paul Carr wrote:
 
> At my new contract, they have Word (och!) and want to output to compiled
> html (by which I assume they mean .chm).  They think.

Yes, that's what .chm, a.k.a., HTMLHelp, is. But if you're not sure that's what they mean or want, you might want to talk with them some more. This is for a Windows app, right? 
 
> My audience is support folks for internal software.
> 
> They think that they want to stay with Word for the source files because,
> down the road, anyone will be able to maintain the source files, since
> everyone knows Word.
> 
> I would like to convince them to switch to Flare or Frame 8.

Why? Based on an analysis of their needs, or just your preference? 

You want to teach the folks who'll maintain the docs FM 8? You realize they can't buy FM 8 anymore (except on eBay, etc.)?
 
> I think that they might agree to switch if I can show them that it would be
> worth it.
> 
> I told them that Frame would make the development of the .chm-friendly
> content much easier than Word, because of Frame's advanced x-ref options,
> for one thing. I believe that I can go from Frame to .chm. Never did it
> before.

Never did it before? Yet you want to convince them that it's better? On what basis? 

BTW, no -- you can't go from Frame to .chm, not directly. And without a HAT (RoboHelp, ePublisher, Mif2Go), it's a fairly crude and cumbersome process. So now you're looking at selling them on Adobe TCS, or some other tool chain, and teaching their non-TW staff multiple apps. 
 
> I am not familiar with Flare, so I could not "sell" Flare per se.

Why would you even _think_ of selling them on a tool you're not familiar with?
 
> Also, a key selling point would be writing software that would provide an
> online review environment in which the SMEs could make tracked changes to
> my document, and I could then accept or change or ignore their changes at
> my leisure.
> 
> I do not see that Flare provides an online review environment for SMEs.
> Framemaker 8 did not provide this. I am not familiar with Frame 9.

FM 9 and 10 (just out) support review PDFs. Reviewers mark up the PDF in Reader, and you can import their markup back into FM as tracked changes.  
> 
> Could anyone offer any guidance on this?

I'm a huge fan of FrameMaker, and I use it every day for print, PDF, and online help deliverables. But that doesn't mean it's the best tool for every situation. You seem to be pushing this client toward a solution that suits your preferences (or your desire to learn something new), not their needs. 

Is the deliverable strictly online help for a Windows app? If so, and you want to explore alternatives to Word as authoring tools, I suggest you limit yourself to HATs. Since this is internal software and your client wants their staff to maintain the help in the future, I suspect the online help doesn't need to push the boundaries of what's possible. I'd seriously evaluate two HATs that have a reputation for being relatively straightforward to learn and use and are no doubt more than powerful enough for your client's needs: 

-- Doc2Help: I haven't used this HAT in several years, but I recall it being user-friendly and easy to integrate into a Word environment. 

-- Help & Manual: I haven't used this HAT at all, but over the years I've seen it frequently praised for its ease of use. A thread just last week on the Techwr-l list ("New doc group: FrameMaker or Flare" site: lists.techwr-l.com) brought forth many posts enthusiastically endorsing H & M for the described situation (which sounded somewhat like yours). 

Please don't push your client into something that isn't well-suited to their needs just because of your own likes and dislikes. 


Richard G. Combs
Senior Technical Writer
Polycom, Inc.
richardDOTcombs AT polycomDOTcom
303-223-5111
------
rgcombs AT gmailDOTcom
303-903-6372
------