I like that it is user friendly and it is generally pretty simple to navigate; you just follow the given instructions/rules and write. Review collected by and hosted on G2.com.

I dislike that there are frequent IT issues. Review collected by and hosted on G2.com.

Usability, the many features, prompt customer support and robustness Review collected by and hosted on G2.com.

Some long-existing known bugs that have not been resolved in years Review collected by and hosted on G2.com.

MadCap Flare is a popular authoring and publishing tool for technical writers that offers a wide range of features such as content management, multi-channel publishing, and localization support. Its ability to generate output in multiple formats, including HTML5, PDF, and mobile apps, is highly appreciated by users. Review collected by and hosted on G2.com.

Madcap Flare's learning curve and high cost. It has been known to have a relatively steep learning curve, which can be a challenge for some users, especially those who are new to technical writing or the software. As for the cost, MadCap Flare is a professional tool designed for complex documentation projects, and as such, it may have a higher price tag than other authoring tools. Review collected by and hosted on G2.com.

MadCap Flare's ever-growing feature set allows technical communicators to create a range of outputs, from online help to support sites to manuals to training courses. The application includes a library of templates for new users and features like pre- and post-build event commands, third-party plugin support, and macro recording capabilities for more experienced users who need to customize outputs for their organizations and automate frequent tasks. MadCap provides excellent customer support and implementation services. The company has created a broad user community around its software, including an annual conference, a Slack channel, a LinkedIn group, and local user groups. Review collected by and hosted on G2.com.

MadCap Flare is on-premise software, which might concern customers looking for a cloud-based solution. However, MadCap does offer a cloud-based solution called Central that can be used with Flare. Review collected by and hosted on G2.com.

Its online, which makes working with other writers easier, however, this only replaces what Flare never did very well with Git Integration Review collected by and hosted on G2.com.

Its missing a lot of functionality that was in Flare

Its buggy, my license stopped working 2 months after it was issued

The price is too high for a half baked product Review collected by and hosted on G2.com.

Every employer I've had that uses Flare also purchased Platinum Service. Their support is top-notch and helps with all user levels of capability. The software itself is great, but I would always recommend also having a support package. Review collected by and hosted on G2.com.

Learning at least a little bit of code is inevitable, and I've worked with many users that are not up to the challenge of deciphering code. Along those same lines, how all the pieces fit together to get the finished product can be complex. If troubleshooting and trying to figure out what's causing an unexpected result isn't your cup of tea, much like any IT field, using Flare may not be one's best choice. Review collected by and hosted on G2.com.

The best thing about MadCap Central is being able to send topics for review and have the contributors make their changes without having to use Flare. It is also great to have the ability to upload our projects to Central and control who has access. Review collected by and hosted on G2.com.

The downside of Central is not being able to send a complete project for review. At the moment, we only publish PDF output and the SMEs are the reviewers, so for them to view the content by topic can be inconvenient for them. The would rather see the whole rather than the parts. Also, I wanted to make use of the taskboard, but it has become more admin, as I am the only writer and our team uses Azure DevOps. Review collected by and hosted on G2.com.

I love using Flare for all of my documention needs. I've been using it since Version 6 (so, a very long time), and I don't see any reason to switch to anything else! It is a great tool for online and printed outputs. I've used it at several companies -- both large and small. At my current company, we use it primarily for online documentation, and we manage several different single-sourced outputs. Some of them are translated into a dozen languages, and Flare makes this easy, too. I've never had a documentation problem that Flare couldn't help me solve. I love its snippet and variables functionalities, its built-in analysis capabilities, and its flexible skin editor. All of the new microcontent features are amazing, too. Review collected by and hosted on G2.com.

If I had to pick one thing, it's only that Flare does have a steep learning curve. It's not a pick-up-and-go software tool. Luckily, Madcap provides great training opportunities within the software (tutorials), in the online help (more tutorials and walkthroughs), and through their training department. It might not be quick to learn, but it's worth taking the time to get to know this software so you can fully take advantage of everything it has to offer. Review collected by and hosted on G2.com.

Things I like about Flare:

* Powerful single sourcing: In general, Flare breaks documentation down to essential components (such as topics, TOCs, layouts) which you can manage separately and then assemble as you wish. Using multiple TOCs, I can easily create several different doc targets using different output formats and adjust my content to match target-specific requirements (from scope to specific wording or variable values).

* Variables are handy for things like company and product names. You can even use variables inside references.

* Text snippets allow for flexible content reuse.

* Conditional tags are great for "conditionalizing" anything from entire topics to specific paragraphs or even words. You can then control which conditions are included into your output (or even what's shown at a topic level).

* Flare has a great editor, which neatly visualizes the underlying HTML structure of a document and enables me to work with tags (move them around, apply classes, and so on). Once you get used to it, it's really hard to go back to things like Robohelp.

* Flare + Central (online hub) provide a collaboration infrastructure that we use both amongst our doc team (git environment for source control) and for reviews (our product owners have a separate account which they use to review updated topics online).

* Flare provides several out-of-the-box HTML5 layouts that serve as a good starting point for new projects: https://www.madcapsoftware.com/downloads/madcap-flare-project-templates/

* Flare has powerful PDF layout tools - I set it up once to match our branding, and then it's push one button - get a ready-made PDF.

* Madcap's support is reasonably quick and never failed to help me out so far. Review collected by and hosted on G2.com.

Things I don't like about Flare:

* This is not so much a critique of Flare, but rather our current CSS template setup. While Flare provides an internal CSS editor, it requires Flare-specific expertise to set it up properly. If your CSS comes from a design team not familiar with Flare, you might run into issues.

* Sort of related to the previous item - Flare doesn't provide flexible enough tools that would enable me to modify the HTML5 layout. It's not impossible - but it requires under-the-hood tinkering and expertise that's not covered by out-of-the-box tools.

* When sending topics for review in Central, I cannot apply any conditional tags - content goes out full, as is, which is not always helpful. Plus, it doesn't allow reviewers to edit text snippets inside topics (only separately). Sometimes I prefer to put my edits into a Word file and send it out to reviewers instead of Central.

* This may be a minor gripe, but Flare doesn't automatically unbind links to topics that are out of scope in your current output (and even Adobe Robohelp could do that, I miss this simple feature).

* Flare doesn't handle large image maps well (it resizes them without resizing the link areas).

* Finally, a strategic consideration: authoring content in Flare requires a desktop application, as opposed to having a web-based option for contributors who are not trained technical writers. This applies to all help authoring tools, but I think it's something to keep in mind, especially if you wish your documentation to be a collaboration between multiple people. Review collected by and hosted on G2.com.

Because Flare works with HTML, the possibilities are almost endless with what you can achieve with your HTML outputs. Advanced HTML content, such as mega-menus, can be added to your outputs as long as you have the HTML knowledge to create them.

From context sensitive in-app help, to regularly updated online help, to static PDFs, Flare can create all the outputs that are typically needed from the same source content with just a quick setup. Review collected by and hosted on G2.com.

With so many features and options in Flare, it is often hard to find out how to do something without checking the online help or user forums. Luckily there's a great user base that is very helpful when new questions come up. Review collected by and hosted on G2.com.