RFP

Request for Proposal to Purchase a
RoboHelp Replacement
Prepared by Radford Bean

Contents
Background........................................................................................................................1
Reason for request ...........................................................................................................1
Evaluation process.............................................................................................................2
Features.........................................................................................................................2
Features......................................................................................................................2
Comparison of programs containing required features................................................14
Comparison of programs containing required features............................................14
Customer service quality..............................................................................................18
Customer service quality..........................................................................................18
Pricing...........................................................................................................................18
Pricing.......................................................................................................................18
Evaluating the software................................................................................................19
Evaluating the software............................................................................................19
Complexity....................................................................................................................20
Complexity................................................................................................................20
Results of the Flare 3.1 evaluation..............................................................................20
Results of the Flare 3.1 evaluation...........................................................................20
Pros...........................................................................................................................21
Cons..........................................................................................................................21
Results of the DoctoHelp Enterprise evaluation..........................................................22
Results of the DoctoHelp Enterprise evaluation.......................................................22
Pros...........................................................................................................................22
Cons..........................................................................................................................23
Conclusion.......................................................................................................................23
Appendix A.......................................................................................................................24
i

Background
The Communications and Media Group (part of the Customer Services Division within the
Public Employee Retirement System (PERS)) purchased RoboHelp to develop help files
members and employers could use to get information about member benefits, using EDX,
reporting member demographics, and reporting employer and member contributions.
eHelp Corporation was the original developer of RoboHelp and was later bought by
Macromedia, which in turn was purchased by Adobe. Adobe laid off the original RoboHelp
customer support staff after purchasing Macromedia.
In January 2007, PERS staff discovered certain RoboHelp features in Suzanne Hein’s project did
not work correctly. The decision was made to go ahead with creating other help files because the
most serious and majority of problems appeared only when created by Suzanne, and she only
created the one project.
After trying to resolve the problems in house for two months, and with ISD’s limited knowledge
of RoboHelp, Clint Chrostopher (TOS manager at the time) made the decision to purchase
Adobe tech support at a cost of $1,600 for the Gold Support Program. PERS purchased the Gold
Support Plan from ASAP in March 2007 but did not receive the support license to take
advantage of technical support. After repeated calls to ASAP (the vendor of choice for PERS) to
find out why PERS had not received the support license, Joelle Beach, contacts and procurement
administration assistant, finally heard back from Brad Hickey, ASAP inside account manager.
Brad informed Joelle that because PERS had purchased the software more than 90 days ago, it
was ineligible to purchase the Gold Support Plan unless it upgraded to RoboHelp Version 6.
PERS went ahead and purchased the upgrade and installed it.
After installing the upgrade, another problem with the software appeared. Moreover, PERS was
told no Gold Support Plan existed for RoboHelp Version 6. ASAP offered PERS a support
program that covered only upgrades but claimed it was the only support plan the agency needed
and would get PERS the technical support it needed to resolve the technical issues. However,
Adobe did not recognize the product number ASAP gave PERS and claimed the agency had not
purchased a support contract with them.
More calls to ASAP, which went unreturned, led to the Department of Administrative Services
(DAS) getting involved. After several months of DAS involvement, the problem with getting
resolution from either ASAP or Adobe continues. So far, seven people at PERS have tried to get
the RoboHelp issues resolved. These issues have now existed 11 months and continue to exist.
Reason for request
David Crosley, PERS communications director, asked me to look at other help authoring tools
(HATs) to see if one exists that will do similar things RoboHelp does. He feels it will be better if
we just cut the agency’s losses and purchase a substitute program from a company who will
provide better technical support on its products.
1

Evaluation process
I evaluated three HATs: MadCap’s Flare 3.1, ComponentOne’s DoctoHelp Enterprise, and
Author-it Software Corporation’s AuthorIT. MadCap is a company founded in 2005 by previous
eHelp Corporation employees.
Features
Content Management
Features/Tools
AuthorIT
Enterprise
DoctoHelp
Enterprise
Flare 3.1
Check-in/check-out: dynamic 
Check-in/check-out: file (may
need separate app)  
Check-in/check-out: project  
Permissions: folders  *
Permissions: groups  *
Permissions: role-based 
Permissions: users  *
Project file database 
Reports   *
Rollback  *
Separation of content and
presentation (ad hoc
formatting allowed)
 
Separation of content and
presentation (no ad hoc
formatting allowed)

Status tracking 
User permissions (security) 
Version control 
Version control: maintenance 
View relationships between
non-topic and topic objects in
a project
 
2

Content Management
topics in a project  
* With source control
Context-Sensitive Help
Features/Tools
AuthorIT
Enterprise
DoctoHelp
Enterprise
Flare 3.1
Aliasing   
API   
Automatic mapping of topics  
Context-sensitive Help: .NET 
Context-sensitive Help:
Web/Mac/*nix applications   
Context-sensitive Help:
Windows applications   
Edit map numbers by topic  
Map number/context ID/map
ID editor  
Customizing the Outputs
Features/Tools
AuthorIT
Enterprise
DoctoHelp
Enterprise
Flare 3.1
Automatic navigational links
(HTML): breadcrumbs   
(HTML): browse sequences   
(HTML): index (link to index
in topic)
  
(HTML): sections
(parent/children/sibling topic
links)
  
(HTML): TOC (link to contents
in topic)
  
3

Command line publishing   
Custom title page for print   
Customizable layouts
(output): cascading style
sheets
  
Features/Tools
AuthorIT
Enterprise
DoctoHelp
Enterprise
Flare 3.1
(output): HTML templates  
(output): WinHelp styles  
(output): Word templates  
Glossary   
Margin notes  
Master page  
Output templates:
customizable   
Output templates: designer
or wizard  
Output templates: localized  
Search in output: CGI (may
require separate CGI script) 
Search in output: DHTML  
Search in output: natural 
Synonym support in search
(HTML-based Help) 
User-customizable: search 
Database and Database Management
Features/Tools
AuthorIT
Enterprise
DoctoHelp
Enterprise
Flare 3.1
4

Database and Database Management
Content database: DB2
Content database: JDBC-
compliant
Content database: JET 
Content database: SQL 
Database maintenance 
Development Features
Features/Tools
AuthorIT
Enterprise
DoctoHelp
Enterprise
Flare 3.1
Automatic documentation
from .NET assemblies 
Code editor 
Color selection tool  
CSS editor (or ability to edit
CSS style definitions)  
CSS: multiple applied to
topics *  
Fonts: create list of favorites 
Full-text search (across
projects)   
HTML help controls   
Metadata: allowed in
development 
Metadata: fields in
development 
Metadata: in output 
Multi-authoring   
Project templates   
Scripting after publication 
Scripting in application (for
example, macros)  
5

Structured authoring:
enforced logically (headings
assigned automatically)

Structured authoring:
enforced technically (through
DTD/schema/application)
  
Topic templates: built in   
Topic templates:
Use regular expressions in
Find and Replace 
Visual structure bars 
Features/Tools
AuthorIT
Enterprise
DoctoHelp
Enterprise
Flare 3.1
WYSIOP editor 
* Must specify in HTML topic template
Development Features - Extra
Features/Tools
AuthorIT
Enterprise
DoctoHelp
Enterprise
Flare 3.1
Additional modules available  *
Author comments 
Custom mark-up language 
Flexible licensing  **
Manage recent files list 
Menu/toolbars: Dreamweaver 
Menu/toolbars: FrameMaker 
Menu/toolbars: FrontPage 
Menu/toolbars: Microsoft
Word 
Multiple glossaries per
project  
Multiple TOCs per project ***  
6

Remote access  
Roadmap available
(upcoming features) 
* Analyzer
** With Enterprise
*** Not necessary because all content is stored on the database
Hyperlinks and Cross-References
Features/Tools
AuthorIT
Enterprise
DoctoHelp
Enterprise
Flare 3.1
ALinks (conceptual links)  
Features/Tools
AuthorIT
Enterprise
DoctoHelp
Enterprise
Flare 3.1
Cross-reference: PDF (output
direct from tool)  
Cross-references: Frame
output 
Cross-references: Word
output   
DHTML: drop-down hotspots   
DHTML: inline hotspots   
DHTML: screenshot hotspots 
Formatted pop-ups   
Jumps   
Jumps to files  
Jumps to secondary windows   
KLinks (keyword links)   
Test: during development 
Text-only pop-ups: Dot Net
Help 
Text-only pop-ups: HTML
Help   
7

Text-only pop-ups: WebHelp  
Topic title and hotspot
synchronization 
URLs   
Images
Features/Tools
AuthorIT
Enterprise
DoctoHelp
Enterprise
Flare 3.1
Image map/SHED editor (built
in)  
Movie-making application:
separate but integrated 
Output controlled by settings   
Features/Tools
AuthorIT
Enterprise
DoctoHelp
Enterprise
Flare 3.1
Resize with template  
Screen capture application:
separated but integrated *
* Requires optional module
Import Features
Features/Tools
AuthorIT
Enterprise
DoctoHelp
Enterprise
Flare 3.1
Batch import   
Context IDs (map IDs) in
.h/.hh/.hm file  
Context IDs (map IDs) in
project   
Generate images for
anchored frames
(FrameMaker)

Import profiles 
Import rules  
8

Import Features
Link imported source files to
project 
Map inline styles to CSS
styles  
Map styles from HTML files  
Map styles from Word or
FrameMaker files   
Preserve source styles  
Reference documents (edited
in original application) 
Saved settings for referenced
files 
Split imported docs:
character count 
Split imported docs: style   
Localization and Translation
Features/Tools
AuthorIT
Enterprise
DoctoHelp
Enterprise
Flare 3.1
Customizable language skins  
Development support (can
have multiple languages
within the project)
 
External translation support  
External translation support:
generate XML file 
Localized interface 
Select language for spell
check  
Support for: double-byte
languages   
Support for: RTL (right-to-left
languages)  
Support for: single-byte
languages   
9

Localization and Translation
Support for: UNICODE   
Translation memory:
integrated 
Reusable Content Across Projects
Features/Tools
AuthorIT
Enterprise
DoctoHelp
Enterprise
Flare 3.1
Alias files (content-sensitive
Help)  
Features/Tools
AuthorIT
Enterprise
DoctoHelp
Enterprise
Flare 3.1
Browse sequences  
Character 
Conditions/conditional tag
sets  
Dictionaries  
File  
Features/Tools
AuthorIT
Enterprise
DoctoHelp
Enterprise
Flare 3.1
Glossary/glossary objects   
Graphics   
Header file (for context-
sensitive Help)  
Hyperlinks 
Imported files  
Index entries  
Index/index objects 
Paragraph 
Publishing destinations  
Search filter sets 
10

Skins/layout design   
Snippets  
Targets  
Templates: external  
Templates: internal  
TOC/TOC objects  
Topic/topic objects  
Variables/variable sets: used
in development   
Variables/variable sets: used
in output templates  
Reusable Content Within Projects
Features/Tools
AuthorIT
Enterprise
DoctoHelp
Enterprise
Flare 3.1
Character  
Conditions/conditional tag
sets  
Features/Tools
AuthorIT
Enterprise
DoctoHelp
Enterprise
Flare 3.1
File   
Frame text inset 
Hyperlinks 
Index entries   
Paragraph  
Reusable formatted chunks
of content   *
Templates: external  
11

Templates: internal  
TOC/TOC objects  
Topic/topic objects  
* Snippets
Single-Sourcing Features
Features/Tools
AuthorIT
Enterprise
DoctoHelp
Enterprise
Flare 3.1
Automatic mini-TOCs for
sections  
Automatic related Topics/See
Also links  
Conditional content: flags or
tags  
Conditional content:
inclusion/exclusion   
Conditional content: styles   
Conditional output variables  
Embedded topics (nesting
topics) 
Modular Help   
Features/Tools
AuthorIT
Enterprise
DoctoHelp
Enterprise
Flare 3.1
Variables, development: file
object   
Variables, development: list
of values   
Variables, development:
system   
Variables, development: text   
Variables: used in output
templates  
12

Support
Features/Tools
AuthorIT
Enterprise
DoctoHelp
Enterprise
Flare 3.1
Email list: private: (must
register) *
Email list: public **  
Email support (free) 
Email support (paid)  
Knowledge base   
Newsgroup/user forums  
Submission/contact form  
Subscription plan   
Support: incident  
Support: limited during
evaluation 
Support: unlimited during
evaluation (typically email) 
Telephone support: free (may
be limited) ***
Telephone support: paid   
Training: from independents
(consultants and trainers)   
Features/Tools
AuthorIT
Enterprise
DoctoHelp
Enterprise
Flare 3.1
Training: from vendor   
Trial (evaluation) available:
crippled output  
Trial (evaluation) available:
time limit 
* AuthorIT users on Yahoo
** HATT, TCP, others
***30-day installation
13

System Administration
Features/Tools
AuthorIT
Enterprise
DoctoHelp
Enterprise
Flare 3.1
Clear locks  
Maintenance: groups 
Maintenance: users 
Search engine tuning 
Separate application (may be
named)  
Table Editor
Features/Tools
AuthorIT
Enterprise
DoctoHelp
Enterprise
Flare 3.1
Drag-and-drop columns 
Drag-and-drop rows 
Table properties 
Table styles editor  
Workflow
Features/Tools
AuthorIT
Enterprise
DoctoHelp
Enterprise
Flare 3.1
Workflow (additional module) 
Workflow: setup (may require
separate app) 
Comparison of programs containing required features
The following chart shows the product features RoboHelp has I deemed necessary in any help
authoring tool PERS chooses to purchase. These features will ensure backward compatibility
with the help file projects already created, thus reducing the hours required to convert the help
files to the new format.
14

Product Comparison of Necessary Features
Features/Tools AuthorIT Enterprise
DoctoHelp
Enterprise
Flare 3.1
Content Management
Reports   *
Source control   
topics in a project  
(HTML): browse sequences   
(HTML): index (link to index
in topic)
  
(HTML): TOC (link to contents
in topic)
  
(output): cascading style
sheets
  
(output): Word templates  
Glossary   
Output templates:
Output templates: designer
or wizard  
DoctoHelp
Enterprise
Flare 3.1
Search in output: DHTML  
Search in output: natural 
Synonym search in search
(HTML-based Help) 
Development Environment
HTML: built-in editor
Microsoft Word  
Microsoft Word 2007  
15

Code editor 
Topic templates:
Flexible licensing  **
DHTML: screenshot hotspots 
Formatted pop-ups   
Jumps   
Jumps to files  
Jumps to secondary windows   
Test: during development 
URLs   
Images
Image map/SHED editor (built
in)  
Screen capture application:
separate but integrated ***
Import Content from..
Microsoft Word   
RoboHelp HTML projects   
DoctoHelp
Enterprise
Flare 3.1
RTF (from Word)   
Import Features
Batch import   
Outputs
HTML-based Help (IE7
compatible)  
PDF   
16

Print (Microsoft Word .doc)   
Dictionaries  
Glossary/glossary objects   
Imported files  
Skins/layout design   
Single-Sourcing Features
Automatic related Topics/See
Also links  
System Administration
Search engine tuning 
Table Editor
Table properties 
* Will require purchasing MadCap’s Feedback Server program.
** With Enterprise
*** With Capture 2.0
17

Customer service quality
Because of the poor technical support PERS has received by ASAP and Adobe, one of the
evaluation criterion was customer service response time.
MadCap I waited less than 15 seconds on hold before a customer service
representative at MadCap answered the phone. Though she was unable to
answer my questions, she was able to transfer me to someone who could, and
that process took less than one minute. MadCap staff answered my questions
accurately.
ComponentOne I had to navigate through a two-step message system before reaching a live
person, but response time was still under a minute. Technical support is
outsourced. The technician (Gary) I talked to spoke with an Indian accent
and was hard at times to understand. Customer service did not always
respond in a timely manner. Note: In all fairness, it was a holiday week when
I called.
Pricing
Pricing is based on direct purchase from the vendor. Since PERS is contracted to purchase
software from ASAP, the price will be different. MadCap does not typically deal with third-party
vendors, but they can make exceptions. From a cost perspective, DoctoHelp is the cheapest to
purchase.
Cost to Purchase Product and Support
Product Cost
AuthorIT Product:
$2,000 - $10,000
Support:
Free for the first year. 19% of total license
tally every year after.
DoctoHelp Enterprise Product:
Subscription: $624.95 (Includes software
upgrades for a year (typically three) and
license.)
Support:
Gold Support and software: $929.95 per
license (competitive upgrade price)
Standard Support: Free telephone support
18

Cost to Purchase Product and Support
Product Cost
for first 30 days. After that, support is
handled on line.
Incident: $99 per incident. Can buy
discounted packs of five and ten.
MadCap Flare 3.1 Product:
$842.70
Support:
Three support plans: Bronze, Gold, and
Platinum.
Bronze: $415.62 ($99 telephone support
charge per incident)
Gold: $519.79 (first six telephone support
incidents are free)
Platinum: $839.58 (unlimited)
MadCap Analyzer $311.45
MadCap Feedback Feedback Server: $2,093.75
Feedback Service (12 months): $750
Evaluating the software
I ranked the software based on which one excelled in the 15 categories shown in the table on
pages 14 - 16. Sometimes more than one software program excelled in a category. Flare 3.1
excelled in 12 categories, followed by DoctoHelp Enterprise in 8, and then AuthorIT in 6. Out of
those 15 categories, I chose the ones that contained critical features. Again, Flare 3.1 excelled by
topping eight categories, followed by DoctoHelp Enterprise, and then AuthorIT. AuthorIT
contained few of the features we needed, so I decided to only evaluate DoctoHelp Enterprise and
Flare 3.1.
Leading software program by category
Critical Categories Program(s)
Content management AuthorIT
Customizing the output DoctoHelp Enterprise and Flare 3.1
19

Leading software program by category
Critical Categories Program(s)
Development environment DoctoHelp Enterprise and Flare 3.1
Development features Flare 3.1
Hyperlinks and cross-references DoctoHelp Enterprise and Flare 3.1
Images DoctoHelp Enterprise and Flare 3.1
Import content from.. AuthorIT, DoctoHelp Enterprise, and Flare
3.1
Outputs DoctoHelp Enterprise and Flare 3.1
Reusable content across projects Flare 3.1
Single-sourcing features AuthorIT and DoctoHelp Enterprise
Evaluating software is a time-consuming process, and given the amount of time (almost one
year) PERS has spent waiting for tech support on RoboHelp and the need to get the issues
resolved fast, I felt it best to first evaluate the most likely candidate for our needs based on the
most critical categories—MadCap’s Flare 3.1.
Complexity
Complexity determines the type of learning curve a person will go through to learn how to use
the software sufficiently to create help files. Everyone learns differently, so complexity and
learning curve are somewhat subjective, but they do serve to give a rough estimate of how long it
will take for someone to come up to speed on using the software. Someone with previous help
authoring experience will be able to master the software quicker than someone with no prior
experience. I took that factor into account when estimating the learning curve involved. MadCap
Flare 3.1 struck me as being somewhat more complex than RoboHelp, especially in the way I
had to create documents. DoctoHelp seemed less complicated to use than Flare 3.1. However, I
was unable to determine the learning curve with DoctoHelp because of issues getting the
program to function properly on my computer (see “Results of the DoctoHelp evaluation”).
Flare training is definitely recommended. With training, I believe an individual could sufficiently
develop help files in one week; without the training and without the person having an
understanding of html (style sheets) or structured language, I feel it will take an individual one
and a half to two months to learn how to use the program adequately enough to create decent
help files.
Results of the Flare 3.1 evaluation
20

In my MadCap Flare 3.1 evaluation, I discovered some critical features were missing. In
addition, I initially had trouble getting the software to function correctly. I had to contact
technical support to resolve the problem. Tech support was timely and excellent.
Pros
Flare 3.1 did not require any special installation requirements. It was not necessary for TOS to
grant me temporary admin rights in order to install the program and have it function correctly.
This is because Flare 3.1 does not integrate itself with Word.
The program does import RoboHelp projects, but I had to make minor tweaks, mostly with the
glossary, some external links, and text related to the RoboHelp interface. A section of the help
file will have to be recreated because the interface and, therefore, the Getting Started section of
the help file will change.
Flare 3.1 allowed me to create .net help files that, while not needed in the agency at this time,
will allow PERS to keep up with current documentation trends (XML and .net) without having to
spend more money later on down the road to invest in a new help authoring tool.
One really nice feature RoboHelp lacked but Flare 3.1 allows is the ability to create browse
sequences in cross-platform help files that allow users to follow closely related help file topics.
Flare 3.1 does allow, albeit at an additional cost, the ability to pull reports on how help files are
performing and how well members’ questions are being answered.
All the videos I created using DemoBuilder worked in the finished project.
Technical support is a toll-free call.
Cons
Flare 3.1 has a very crowded interface. There are several more toolbars in Flare 3.1 than in
RoboHelp, and they are more cluttered. Some of the navigation buttons are difficult to see
because of the background color.
Whereas RoboHelp uses Word as its editor, MadCap Flare 3.1 does not. It makes extensive use
of style sheets and structured language as noted earlier, so there will be some learning involved.
Note: This is only a con if the person using the program has no html or XML authoring
experience.
In Flare 3.1, I created the topics and then created the TOC, basically it is a two-step process. In
RoboHelp, creating a TOC is a one-step process.
There is no feature that allows me to print the documents I am working on in the XML editor.
The entire help file must be published, and then it can be printed. (One caveat: Word 2003 with
the latest service pack is required in order to publish help files as printed documentation.)
One of the features of the current help files members really like is the Form button. Flare 3.1
lacks a library of buttons and cursors and the functionality of placing buttons in a project and
21

automatically assigning hyperlinks to them. That is not to say I cannot place a hyperlinked button
in a Flare 3.1 project; however, I had to create the button outside of Flare 3.1 and then insert it in
the project like a graphic. I then had to assign a hyperlink to the button. Subsequently, a graphics
program is required for creating or editing buttons found elsewhere. (This program can be as
simple as Microsoft Paint.) Flare 3.1 includes buttons, which the program uses, and I was able to
locate those buttons in the Program Files directory to use in my project, but I still needed a
graphics program to add text to the buttons.
Formatting text and paragraphs in Flare 3.1 requires editing style sheets. I found it downright
impossible to edit a bullet’s position. Every time I wanted to left justify a numbered step, the
number would disappear. Flare 3.1 would only allow me to have numbered steps if I allowed the
program to indent the paragraph. I was able to create hanging indents, but the lack of tabs
prevented me from placing space between the number and text—using the space bar only allows
the text to move one space to the right. I was able to work around this issue by creating a two-
column table and placing the step number in the first column and the text in the second—the
same method I used in RoboHelp and the best way to avoid text not aligning properly when the
help file window is resized. In fact, it is common practice to use tables in html programming for
such a task. Note: This is only listed as a con because someone unfamiliar with html
programming might struggle with achieving good formatting results.
To view a report of how well people are able to find the information they are looking for, it will
be necessary to purchase either MadCap’s Feedback Service or Feedback Server product. Both
are expensive. In addition, we will need to purchase Analyzer to test for broken links. This
ability comes standard in RoboHelp, although Analyzer is a more robust diagnostic tool.
Like RoboHelp, help files developed using Flare 3.1 must be created and saved on the local PC
and then either published to the Web server or certain files copied to the server (in the case of
Windows .html help files).
Results of the DoctoHelp Enterprise evaluation
Before I could evaluate DoctoHelp Enterprise, I had to call technical support twice to resolve
problems with the software’s functionality. I could not get the editor (Word) to work and got
several error messages. I never did get the program to function correctly.
Pros
Technical support was fast and accurate.
DoctoHelp Enterprise has a very simple user interface, which requires minimal training.
DoctoHelp Enterprise can use Word as the editor to create help file documents. This allows
someone with no html or XML experience to create documents much quicker than in Flare 3.1. It
also allows more flexibility in using bullets and numbered steps.
22

Cons
Technical support is outsourced, which means it may be difficult to understand the person over
the phone. It is also a long-distance toll call.
After an hour-long tech support call trying to get the program to function correctly, technical
support determined the problem was due to issue that I was not using FrontPage or Dreamweaver
as my html editor. DoctoHelp Enterprise requires FrontPage or Dreamweaver as its html editor. I
edit html documents in either Word or Notepad. (RoboHelp uses Word as its text and html
editor, and Flare 3.1 has its own editor because it creates structured documents.)
RoboHelp files are not converted seamlessly. I wound up with missing file errors after the
conversion, and hotspots and Flash videos would not work. Technical support told me that I
would need to write html code if I want to incorporate Flash videos.
Installing the program requires TOS to grant temporary admin rights to the user so the software
can be installed under his or her profile. This is because DoctoHelp uses Word as its editor, and
the program will not integrate correctly with Word if it is installed under the network
administrators profile—key files don’t get installed in the correct user directory.
DoctoHelp Enterprise lacks a reporting feature that would allow someone to view which help
topics members are trying to locate but are unable to find, which topics are most commonly
viewed, and how often the help file is being used. This feature is extremely valuable and one that
David Crosley really likes. It is this feature in RoboHelp that stopped working when PERS
upgraded the software.
Conclusion
I concluded from my evaluation that DoctoHelp Enterprise would be cheaper to purchase and
easier to learn than MadCap Flare 3.1. However, I cannot recommend PERS purchase
DoctoHelp Enterprise as a RoboHelp replacement because DoctoHelp Enterprise:
1) requires either FrontPage or Dreamweaver,
2) doesn’t support multimedia files,
3) lacks a reporting feature, and
4) must be installed with the user being granted temporary admin rights.
Because of the limitations I just outlined, I recommend PERS replace RoboHelp with MadCap
Flare 3.1.
23

RFP

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

Similar to RFP

Similar to RFP (20)

RFP