using word for image-heavy manuals

[kataphoradesign]

Can anyone tell me if the new MS Word 2004 is sufficient enough to use
for laying out manuals that contain a lot of images/photography?

Currently I am using Adobe Indesign, which is nice for me a Mac user
but PC users won't be able to edit the document. Also I like the
Table of Contents featured in Mac.

So if anyone has any ideas please share them, thanks!

 

[Daiya Mitchell]

I'm quite sure there's a Windows version of InDesign that people could
use to edit this document. Or use Acrobat to add notes to a PDF.

Word is NOT a page layout program, as InDesign is. Using lots of images
in Word is a huge hassle. And if you are used to InDesign, I think it
would drive you mad, as the two programs work very differently. This is
true of every version of Word, Mac and Windows. I haven't used WinWord
2007 yet, but I don't think they changed the fundamental principles.

Word Doesn't Know What a Page Is
http://word.mvps.org/Mac/PagesInWord.html

A whole page of tips on Graphics, generally written in response to
frequently asked questions:
http://word.mvps.org/FAQs/DrwGrphcs/

When people start creating image-heavy manuals in Word, they fight
through it rather than buy the expensive InDesign, but you already have
a better tool for this project than Word will ever be.

 

[Elliott Roper]

Can anyone tell me if the new MS Word 2004 is sufficient enough to use
for laying out manuals that contain a lot of images/photography?

Currently I am using Adobe Indesign, which is nice for me a Mac user
but PC users won't be able to edit the document. Also I like the
Table of Contents featured in Mac.

So if anyone has any ideas please share them, thanks!

Daiya is right. It is like herding cats.

However, if your work flow permits, get the body text right before
placing the art. Word and InDesign work well together.
Match up styles in both, and you will find it easy to pour great
armfuls of Word text into InDesign. Placing the pictures is where
InDesign is worth every penny. It will also get the typography right,
which is more than Word will do -- unless you are a dedicated author of
church newsletters, where having good typography is the sin of pride.

I'd follow Daiya's advice on using PDF annotations from reviewers too.
Letting every man and his dog loose on an almost final document is
*worse* than herding cats.

 

[Daiya Mitchell]

In other words--if you treat the images just as though they were text,
they won't cause problems. Okay, I'll retract my advice, with that
caveat.