Re: Word Perfect for GS -- Who Sells it...?

[land@ (E.G. Land)]

In article <4pf5ft$rik@gap.cco.caltech.edu>,
Nathan Mates <nathan@cco.caltech.edu> wrote:
>In article <4pd2f4$8a6@news.smart.net>, E.G. Land <land@> wrote:
>>	Bought a copy of AW 5.0 from Scantron, very disappointed.
>
>>	Primitive word processor, steep learning curve, you view only
>>	1/3 of your document at time; that's no good for professional
>>	word processing.
>
>   If you think Appleworks has a 'steep' learning curve, you didn't
>open the manual and read how to do stuff. Let's just say that without
>any manuals, I figured out most of the commands of Appleworks 1.0 back
>in sixth grade after the (idiot) teacher locked up all the manuals and
>refused to read them herself.

	Look, I spent an hour fooling around with margins, tabs, and 
	headers.

	The margins feature covered my document with a billion little
	errors. It would also seemingly change margins on its own accord,
	or not execute them immediately.
	
	Headers were real freaky... Still haven't figured out how to get
	visible page numbers on each page of my document while I'm working
	on it. And why isn't my header appearing on each page?

	I'm sure there's logical answers for the above, but I'm not
	finding them!

>
>   Further, viewing only 1/3 of a "document" at a time on the screen
>is an interesting claim for "unprofessionalism." Given that Appleworks
>gives you about 20 lines onscreen, your documents must be a page long,
>tops.
>
>   If you're going to criticize something for "a small view," you're
>one spoiled kid. Word processing has been done on the Apple II since
>the late 1970s on 40x24 or 80x24 screens. Famous writers like Jerry
>Pournelle used Apple IIs just fine. [Go read the author's notes on
>_Earth_ where he states that he used an Apple II for the first part of
>the book, and a Mac II for the second. You can really see the
>stylistic differences between the halves, and I liked the Apple II one
>better.] On the IBM PC side, word processors were in 80x25 text mode 
>[one whole more line of text on the screen. It's not 1/3 of your
>document, it's 34%. Whoope f****n doo!] for a darn long time also, and
>people used them professionally as well.
>

	You sound like one cranky adult. I know what I like; I know what
	I want for my money. Up until recently I had an XT and used
	QA Write to do my word processing. This product is light years
	ahead of AW. I was led to believe AW was a similar high-powered
	wp. It isn't. Adequate for some, perhaps, but not for me. 

>   After reading many quotes from a real professional writer,
>J. Michael Straczynski, creator and author of about 90% of the SF TV
>show Babylon 5, as well as "The Complete Guide to Scriptwriting" and
>several hundred TV shows to his credit, he's got an different approach
>than yours. According to him, writing is an art that doesn't depend on
>the tools at hand, but on what you've got in your head. If you've got
>a story in your head, you don't need to see the surrounding 50 lines
>of context on a screen-- you could see things a line at a time and
>everything would come out well. 
>

	Get da fuck outta here...

	"If you've got a story in your head, you don't need..."

	What do you just like to hear yourself talk, or what?

	Or maybe you teach creative writing somewhere?

	More then likely you're just some nimrod with a big mouth. Excuse
	me if I by-pass your lecture on creative writing, pal. I know
	what I need to work at my peak and it isn't the sophistry you seem
	to revel in. 

>   Writers survived for a few millenia using pen and ink. Not that we
>can't do better, but complaining about not being able to connect up a
>21" monitor to your computer just so that you can see 2 pages at once
>and have the software support that is pushing it. If you've got a
>story that you _must_ tell, you'll use any means possible. The way
>you write it is unimportant as long as others can read it.

	Hey, read the heading of this post. I want information about
	Word Perfect. I express the things I don't like about AW. And
	like a bad odor here you come like some attack dog from hell
	making all kinds of bizarre sound bites. 

	"...complaining about not being able to connect up a
	21" monitor...so that you can see 2 pages at once..."

	What? Where da fuck did I say that? Where da fuck did I say
	anything remotely similar to that?

	What is your problem, man?

>
>>	What about Word Perfect? Who does it stack up, and where can I
>>	buy it?
>
>   I suppose you meant to say "How does it stack up?" so I'll answer
>that. First off, the //e version would use _exactly_ the same text
>mode, giving you the same problem of not being able to see too
>much. [Face it: graphics circa 1983 are not the Apple //e's strong
>point. You are NOT going to get something that zooms out to 75% or 50%
>views.] 
>
>   Word Perfect's learning curve is far worse from what I remember--
>it's a pure text interface also. Word Perfect for the Apple //e is
>further not being sold any more. The only place to buy it is used on
>the comp.sys.apple2.marketplace newsgroup.
>
>Nathan Mates
>-- 
><*> Nathan Mates http://www.ugcs.caltech.edu/~nathan/      <*>


	Thanks for nothing...


	BARD