Comments on: [Viewpoint] The Right and Wrong of Quark and Adobe Strategies http://thecontentwrangler.com/2008/05/06/viewpoint_the_right_and_wrong_of_quark_and_adobe_strategies/ Content is a business asset worthy of being managed Fri, 10 Feb 2012 16:31:44 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3 By: Eric Kuhnen http://thecontentwrangler.com/2008/05/06/viewpoint_the_right_and_wrong_of_quark_and_adobe_strategies/comment-page-1/#comment-312 Eric Kuhnen Wed, 07 May 2008 16:19:56 +0000 http://localhost:8888/ee/?p=345#comment-312 <p>M Pinault, </p> <p> You’ve cited a fine example and it dovetails with my experience.  One of my clients considered offering its CMS to the SMB market, but found that the value proposition SMB customers wasn’t as dramatic as its was to a global enterprise customers. </p> <p> In your example, a 50-page customer hand-out does not have enough complexity, variety, distribution to warrant the up-front and on-going expenditures of an RDBMS-based ECM. </p> <p> Now, if Quark built a file-system CMS as part of their DPS solution, your client could have embarked on a campaign to increase reuse without the overhead of learning to use an ECM.  In that way, DPS would not be overkill, if I understand the implication of your comment. </p> <p> Thanks, </p> <p> Eric </p> M Pinault,

You’ve cited a fine example and it dovetails with my experience.  One of my clients considered offering its CMS to the SMB market, but found that the value proposition SMB customers wasn’t as dramatic as its was to a global enterprise customers.

In your example, a 50-page customer hand-out does not have enough complexity, variety, distribution to warrant the up-front and on-going expenditures of an RDBMS-based ECM.

Now, if Quark built a file-system CMS as part of their DPS solution, your client could have embarked on a campaign to increase reuse without the overhead of learning to use an ECM.  In that way, DPS would not be overkill, if I understand the implication of your comment.

Thanks,

Eric

]]> By: M Pinault http://thecontentwrangler.com/2008/05/06/viewpoint_the_right_and_wrong_of_quark_and_adobe_strategies/comment-page-1/#comment-311 M Pinault Wed, 07 May 2008 12:06:00 +0000 http://localhost:8888/ee/?p=345#comment-311 <p>Informative article, especially concerning how “to get the biggest bang for ECM buck.” The companies that I work with typically want a publishing solution with content management capabilities, but they have a small number of documents and are in reality are unwilling to pay for and maintain what they ideally want. One organization used Quark XPress for years to handle their 50-paged customer handout, but even though they want to content re-use, I think that a “Dynamic Publishing Solution” is overkill. </p> Informative article, especially concerning how “to get the biggest bang for ECM buck.” The companies that I work with typically want a publishing solution with content management capabilities, but they have a small number of documents and are in reality are unwilling to pay for and maintain what they ideally want. One organization used Quark XPress for years to handle their 50-paged customer handout, but even though they want to content re-use, I think that a “Dynamic Publishing Solution” is overkill.

]]>