TrustRadius Insights for MadCap Flare are summaries of user sentiment data from TrustRadius reviews and, when necessary, third party data sources.
Business Problems Solved
Flare, a documentation authoring tool, has proven to be valuable for a wide range of use cases based on user experiences. Users have found that Flare provides a modern online help appearance without the need for designing custom styles. It enables users to organize and manage their knowledge base effectively, offering robust options for customization and organization. Onboarding with Flare is relatively quick, with a small learning curve for writers to get up and running. Flare integrates well with other MadCap products, allowing for seamless workflow and reporting capabilities. It also simplifies user assistance and troubleshooting by providing different outputs from a single source. Flare's flexibility allows for adapting content to different customer needs through CSS functionality. Moreover, single sourcing with Flare reduces the chance of copy/paste errors and allows for outputting to multiple audiences, resulting in significant time-saving and efficiency in content creation. Whether it's generating online help documentation for major application products or creating product manuals and work instructions, Flare proves to be effective in streamlining documentation processes for technical writers across various industries.
Loading Reviews List....
MadCap Flare Reviews
2 Reviews
InformationComputer Software2
Search is temporarily unavailable. Filters are still applied.
MadCap Flare is used by the technical writing team at my company. We use it to write and publish all of our documentation.
Pros
Snippets, variables, and conditioning are all good
Once you set it up, updating Help websites is easy.
Cons
I use it on a mac with windows parallel and it can be so buggy and laggy.
I would love it if the software was entirely cloud-based, like Google Docs.
Reviewing in Central is not a good experience, need better review functionality.
Likelihood to Recommend
If you're just building a help website or maybe a lengthy user guide, MadCap is great.
If you're exporting your documents somewhere that doesn't support MadCap integration, there's a chance it'll be more of a headache. For example, we export a lot of our docs to an LMS, and it requires us to build each document on its own. So, even if we update a snippet, we have to re-upload all affected articles.
We use MadCap for all of our technical writing needs. This includes product guides and software user manuals. The software addresses the need of hosting our documentation as well as allowing us to share documents with peers for review before publication. The software also (attempts) to address issues of single-source documentation through features such as Snippets and Variables, though this is often a pain point.
The software does allow for "conditioning" of certain content within a single document, allowing you to publish only certain parts of a document depending on where you're publishing it. For example, an Introduction paragraph might be necessary for learning materials but not in-product help. Conditioning allows for that. This is a feature we put to work quite often within our organization.
Pros
Organizing articles via an overall project outline.
Syncing with teammates.
Cons
The software is often quite buggy, and certain bugs seem to date back nearly a decade and still persist.
Customizing shortcuts is often an ordeal.
Likelihood to Recommend
MadCap is well suited if you have a document that needs to be published in various locations, each with slightly tweaked content. It's easy enough to set certain paragraphs or sections to publish in a specific location but not others. MadCap is difficult to work with teammates. There are a lot of "rules" you have to stick to when syncing work to ensure one writer doesn't overwrite another's work.