home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Path: sparky!uunet!pipex!warwick!warwick!not-for-mail
- From: cudcv@csv.warwick.ac.uk (Rob McMahon)
- Newsgroups: comp.unix.questions
- Subject: Re: IS UNIX DEAD? (long)
- Date: 20 Nov 1992 16:28:20 -0000
- Organization: Computing Services, University of Warwick, UK
- Lines: 24
- Message-ID: <1ej3n4INNa5r@sprocket.csv.warwick.ac.uk>
- References: <1992Nov18.001148.2448@global.hacktic.nl> <1992Nov18.133433.21809@ifi.unizh.ch> <1992Nov20.003831.969@global.hacktic.nl>
- NNTP-Posting-Host: sprocket.csv.warwick.ac.uk
-
- In article <1992Nov20.003831.969@global.hacktic.nl> peter@global.hacktic.nl
- (Peter Busser) writes:
- >>FrameMaker: about $3000 (if I convert the swiss price to US$, might be
- >> less in the US, however)
- >
- >>You get almost the same under UNIX from
- >>Emacs & TeX: $0 (maybe you'll have to add media cost)
- >
- >That's rediculous! emTeX for DOS or OS/2 costs as much and offers as much. But
- >it isn't Framemaker. So what you say here has nothing to do with what were
- >talking about: the difference in numbers and prices of applications.
-
- Comparing emacs & TeX with FrameMaker is indeed ridiculous (although I confess
- I prefer working that way), but FrameMaker cost us <\pounds 200 one-off,
- including printed documentation, ~\pounds 100 each for more than 5 floating
- licences, running on Sun workstations. Interleaf came in at something like
- \pounds 30-40 a licence, but FrameMaker seemed to be worth the extra money.
- That't not so ridiculous.
-
- Rob
- --
- UUCP: ...!mcsun!uknet!warwick!cudcv PHONE: +44 203 523037
- JANET: cudcv@uk.ac.warwick INET: cudcv@warwick.ac.uk
- Rob McMahon, Computing Services, Warwick University, Coventry CV4 7AL, England
-