Path: gmdzi!unido!mcsun!uunet!spool2.mu.edu!sdd.hp.com!ucsd!ucbvax!ucdavis!
iris!zerkle
From: zer...@iris.ucdavis.edu (Dan Zerkle)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.applications
Subject: When will new WordPerfect be available?
Message-ID: <8133@ucdavis.ucdavis.edu>
Date: 9 Jan 91 07:01:51 GMT
Sender: use...@ucdavis.ucdavis.edu
Reply-To: zer...@iris.ucdavis.edu (Dan Zerkle)
Organization: U.C. Davis - Department of Electrical Engineering and Computer 
Science
Lines: 6
Posted: Wed Jan  9 01:01:51 1991

Does anybody know when a better version of WordPerfect that will
function well under 2.0 will be out?  Will there be an upgrade to 5.0,
5.1, or even (drool) 6.0?

           Dan Zerkle  zer...@iris.eecs.ucdavis.edu  (916) 754-0240
           Amiga...  Because life is too short for boring computers.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Path: gmdzi!unido!mcsun!uunet!pallas!wally
From: wa...@pallas.athenanet.com (Wally Hartshorn)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.applications
Subject: Re: When will new WordPerfect be available?
Summary: I need to transfer the registration on my copy.
Keywords: WordPerfect
Message-ID: <510@pallas.athenanet.com>
Date: 12 Jan 91 04:14:42 GMT
References: <8133@ucdavis.ucdavis.edu>
Reply-To: wa...@pallas.UUCP (Wally Hartshorn)
Organization: Athenanet, Inc.,  Springfield, Illinois
Lines: 20

I bought a used copy of WordPerfect.  I have the manual, the original
disks, and it was registered by the original owner.  After a time
I heard that there was an upgrade available.  I called WordPerfect
to find out what I needed to do to get the registration transferred
over to my name.  They needed the registration number (which I have)
and a letter from the original owner transferring his rights to me.
Unfortunately, the original owner sold it because he was in the process
of getting a divorce from his wife.  The last I heard of him, he was
living in a motel somewhere.  :-(  Anyway, I know someone who thinks
they can get in touch with him, so I'll get that taken care of eventually.

I use version 5.1 at work on a DOS machine and am VERY envious!  I'd
be happy if WordPerfect would just port over the non-graphics features
and release a 4.5 or something.  Perhaps now that the A3000 is out and
seems to be gaining popularity with the professional crowd we might be
able to talk WordPerfect into upgrading the Amiga version.
-- 
Wally (uunet!pallas!wally or wa...@athenanet.com)

"Signature needed.  Apply within."

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Path: utzoo!dciem!nttor!contact!ben
From: b...@contact.uucp (Ben Eng)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.applications
Subject: Re: When will new WordPerfect be available?
Keywords: WordPerfect
Message-ID: <1991Jan12.223304.28382@contact.uucp>
Date: 12 Jan 91 22:33:04 GMT
References: <8133@ucdavis.ucdavis.edu> <510@pallas.athenanet.com>
Distribution: na
Organization: Jet Penguin Lavatories
Lines: 53

In <5...@pallas.athenanet.com> wa...@pallas.athenanet.com (Wally Hartshorn) 
writes:

>I use version 5.1 at work on a DOS machine and am VERY envious!  I'd
>be happy if WordPerfect would just port over the non-graphics features
>and release a 4.5 or something.  Perhaps now that the A3000 is out and
>seems to be gaining popularity with the professional crowd we might be
>able to talk WordPerfect into upgrading the Amiga version.

I can't see what is so desirable about WordPerfect 5.1 on a DOS
machine, that cannot be done better on an Amiga without WordPerfect.
WP5 is slow, clunky, chunky, over-weight, overbearing, and lacking in
usefulness.

If you really wanted to do "professional" typesetting, especially
without graphics, then you should be using TeX.  AmigaTeX in
particular by Tomas Rokicki is by far the most wonderful piece of
software that is available on the Amiga for any type of textual
output.  It is especially suited to "professionals" who need to
typeset mathematics and tables.

Unlike a WYSIWYG system, such as WP5 or a page layout program, TeX
handles all the kerning, paragraphing, spacing, margins, page breaks,
indenting, centering, and other subtle details automatically.  Title
pages, Abstracts, Tables of Contents, List  of Figures, List of
Tables, Chapters, Sections, Subsections, Bibliographies, References,
footnotes, figures, tables, references to numbering of
tables/figures/etc, ALL numbering (page, chapter, section, etc.), and
virtually everything else is all done for you.

You just have to supply the meat and potatoes along with a bit of
spice (some magic keywords) to do anything in LaTeX.

And if you do want to include IFF or PostScript graphics in your
document, that is possible too without any more effort than inserting
a line of text.

Additionally, the Amiga is such a superior environment for TeX because
it is multitasking.  Arexx allows one to have a completely integrated
environment.  With ARexx, CygnusEd, TeX, preview, ISpell, MetaFont,
and some DVI printer drivers the AmigaTeX environment becomes much
more desirable than WP5 or any other WYSIWYG system.

Of course, these are only my opinions (subjective as they may be).  I
don't have any affiliation with Radical Eye Software.  I just fell in
love with AmigaTeX, and I think every Amiga owner should at least look
into what AmigaTeX is, to see what they are missing.

Ben
-- 
Ben Eng                  | b...@contact.uucp  (416)-431-3333
150 Beverley St. Apt #1L | Bix: jetpen
Toronto, Ontario M5T 1Y6 | UofT Engineering Science: e...@ecf.toronto.edu
_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_| Home: (416)-979-7885, (416)-979-8761

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!swrinde!
zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!julius.cs.uiuc.edu!ux1.cso.uiuc.edu!news.iastate.edu!skank
From: sk...@iastate.edu (Skank George L)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.applications
Subject: Re: When will new WordPerfect be available?
Keywords: WordPerfect
Message-ID: <1991Jan13.092642.17590@news.iastate.edu>
Date: 13 Jan 91 09:26:42 GMT
References: <8133@ucdavis.ucdavis.edu> <510@pallas.athenanet.com> 
<1991Jan12.223304.28382@contact.uucp>
Sender: n...@news.iastate.edu (USENET News System)
Distribution: na
Organization: Iowa State University, Ames, IA
Lines: 31

In article <1991Jan12.223304.28...@contact.uucp> b...@contact.uucp (Ben Eng) writes:
>In <5...@pallas.athenanet.com> wa...@pallas.athenanet.com (Wally Hartshorn) writes:
>
>>I use version 5.1 at work on a DOS machine and am VERY envious!  I'd
>>be happy if WordPerfect would just port over the non-graphics features
>>and release a 4.5 or something.  Perhaps now that the A3000 is out and
>>seems to be gaining popularity with the professional crowd we might be
>>able to talk WordPerfect into upgrading the Amiga version.
>
>Additionally, the Amiga is such a superior environment for TeX because
>it is multitasking.  Arexx allows one to have a completely integrated
>environment.  With ARexx, CygnusEd, TeX, preview, ISpell, MetaFont,
>and some DVI printer drivers the AmigaTeX environment becomes much
>more desirable than WP5 or any other WYSIWYG system.

	I'd like to put in a plug for MSS Excellence.  For those of you
who don't need the powerfull mathematical formatting capabilities of TeX
there is MSS Excellence.  Excellence 2.0 is a WYSIWYG word processor that
supports postscript (even color postscript!), and virtual memory.  The
program is stable under 2.0 and seems to multitask very well.  Excellence
has a large dictionary (to check your spelling :) and a large thesarus (for
those hard to describe things).  I've heard that it is similar to Microsoft
Word, though I've never used Word.  That may or may not be a good point for
people here.  At least using the PostScript fonts, Excellence seems to be
reasonably true to its WYSIWYG claim.

--

George L. Skank			|
sk...@iastate.edu		|Fast cars, fast women, fast computers...
Senior, Electrical Engineering	|(not necessarily in that order)

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Path: gmdzi!unido!mcsun!uunet!wuarchive!uwm.edu!ux1.cso.uiuc.edu!news.iastate.edu!
ccvax.iastate.edu!taab5
From: ta...@ccvax.iastate.edu (Marc Barrett)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.applications
Subject: Re: When will new WordPerfect be available?
Message-ID: <1991Jan14.002805.1@ccvax.iastate.edu>
Date: 14 Jan 91 06:28:05 GMT
Sender: n...@news.iastate.edu (USENET News System)
Lines: 95


In <5...@pallas.athenanet.com> wa...@pallas.athenanet.com (Wally Hartshorn) writes:

>>I use version 5.1 at work on a DOS machine and am VERY envious!  I'd
>>be happy if WordPerfect would just port over the non-graphics features
>>and release a 4.5 or something.  Perhaps now that the A3000 is out and
>>seems to be gaining popularity with the professional crowd we might be
>>able to talk WordPerfect into upgrading the Amiga version.

And in <1991Jan12.223304.28...@contact.uucp> <b...@contact.uucp> writes:

>If you really wanted to do "professional" typesetting, especially
>without graphics, then you should be using TeX.  AmigaTeX in
>particular by Tomas Rokicki is by far the most wonderful piece of
>software that is available on the Amiga for any type of textual
>output.  It is especially suited to "professionals" who need to
>typeset mathematics and tables.

   Talk about a steep learning curve!  TeX is fine, as long as you have
a degree in typesetting or have a lot of time to learn to use it.  TeX
is powerful, but is in the same category with programs like AutoCAD in
terms of how easy it is to learn to use it.

And in <1991Jan13.092642.1...@news.iastate.edu> <sk...@iastate.edu> writes:

>   I'd like to put in a plug for MSS Excellence.  For those of you
>who don't need the powerfull mathematical formatting capabilities of TeX
>there is MSS Excellence.  Excellence 2.0 is a WYSIWYG word processor that
>supports postscript (even color postscript!), and virtual memory.  The
>program is stable under 2.0 and seems to multitask very well.  Excellence
>has a large dictionary (to check your spelling :) and a large thesarus (for
>those hard to describe things).  I've heard that it is similar to Microsoft
>Word, though I've never used Word.  That may or may not be a good point for
>people here.  At least using the PostScript fonts, Excellence seems to be
>reasonably true to its WYSIWYG claim.

   Excellence! has the most misleading name of any Amiga program yet.
It is better named 'mediocrity!' because that is exactly what it is.  None
of the Amiga word processors (yes, I have tried them all) can even begin
to hold a candle to Microsoft Word for the Macintosh.  Anyone who doubts
this has never even tried Microsoft Word.

   All of the Amiga word processors (yes, *ALL* of them) are but fancy
text editors compared to MS Word.  Sure, the basic features are there --
such as color graphics, a thesaurus, a spell checker, and maybe a
grammatics tool -- but none of them have any depth whatsoever.  And it
is in depth that MS Word truly excels over any other word processor.

   If anyone doubts that MS Word is not vastly better than any of the
Amiga word processors, I suggest you take a look at the book entitled
'Working with Word, Second Edition'.  This book is over 700 pages long,
and yet none of it is fluff.  Every one of the 700+ pages is filled
with information on using MS Word.  I had been using MS Word for over
a year, and did not realize just how powerful this word processor is
until I got this book.  MS Word has features that go well beyond just
word processing, and well into desktop publishing and typesetting.
It rivals TeX capabilities, and yet is as easy-to-use as any of the
Amiga word processors.

   I find, as I read the Amiga newsgroups and talk to Amiga users, that
Amiga users think that the Amiga word processors are good simply because
they have never seen anything powerful like MS Word.  If they did, they
would realize just how incredibly weak these word processors are.

   As for the original poster's question about when WordPerfect for the
Amiga will be significantly upgraded, the answer is probably never.  The
WordPerfect company lost a lot of money on the Amiga, mostly out of
stupidity on their part.  They produced a non-graphics word processor
for a graphics-oriented computer, and wondered why it wasn't selling.
They know that if they had produced a non-graphics word processor for
the MAC, it would have been regarded as an insult to the MAC, and they
would be lucky to sell 10 copies.  Yet they did precisely this to the
Amiga.  Unfortunately, Amiga users are more forgiving than MAC users,
and it sold well for a while, but then sales slumped and they didn't
know why.  Finally, they threatened to cut Amiga support entirely,
blaming the Amiga for lackluster sales when their own total stupidity
was to blame.

   Don't try to pursuade Word Perfect into better supporting the Amiga,
because it won't work.  When WordPerfect Corp. threatened to cut
development of Amiga WordPerfect entirely, I organized  massive
letter writing campaign (by leaving messages on CI$, and writing
letters to a couple of Amiga magazines -- letters that were printed,
BTW), and this only succeeded in getting them to keep a pathetic
two programmers to update the Amiga version of WordPerfect.  By
comparison, WordPerfect keeps a staff of over 30 programmers to
update the MAC version.

   The really sad part of this is that other big-name companies like
Microsoft, Lotus, Aldus, and Adobe will probably never write software
for the Amiga, because one big-name company tried to support the Amiga
and lost a lot of money.


                                 -MB-

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Path: gmdzi!unido!mcsun!uunet!zaphod!ncar!gatech!psuvax1!psuvm!axn100
From: AXN...@psuvm.psu.edu
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.applications
Subject: Re: When will new WordPerfect be available?
Message-ID: <91014.113702AXN100@psuvm.psu.edu>
Date: 14 Jan 91 16:37:02 GMT
References: <1991Jan14.002805.1@ccvax.iastate.edu>
 <1991Jan14.073918.27523@mintaka.lcs.mit.edu>
 <1991Jan14.092400.10827@marlin.jcu.edu.au>
 <1991Jan14.104559.23914@cunixf.cc.columbia.edu>
Organization: Penn State University
Lines: 17


     God I hate my self for saying this but, Mark Barret is right about the
applications in the Amiga world.  Have any of you who are flaming MB tried
Word or 123?  Word for the MAC is one of the best, if not the best,
wordprocessors around.  I have tried both Excellence and ProWrite (Yes, the
latest versions) and still they don't compare to Word.  How do I try all of
these new programs?  I told several friends that there were no Amiga
wordprocessors that compare to Word, and it has become their single goal in
life to prove me wrong.  I hope that they do, but for now the Word is still
the best.  As for Spreadsheets, 123 is the best.  Why because it is the
standard (please no flames :) ).  Go into any major company and see which
spredsheet they use, 9 times out of 10 it will be 123. You can complain all you
want about their lawsuits, but their support of their product is incredible,
and I for one am praying that they soon port 123 to the Amiga.  So if you
want to flame Mark Barret, please try the programs you are taling about.

                                             Ajai

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Path: gmdzi!unido!mcsun!uunet!spool2.mu.edu!think.com!zaphod!wuarchive!bcm!
dimacs.rutgers.edu!aramis.rutgers.edu!paul.rutgers.edu!njin!limonce
From: limo...@pilot.njin.net (Tom Limoncelli)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.applications
Subject: Re: When will new WordPerfect be available?
Message-ID: <Jan.14.18.59.41.1991.29710@pilot.njin.net>
Date: 14 Jan 91 23:59:42 GMT
References: <1991Jan14.002805.1@ccvax.iastate.edu> <1092@macuni.mqcc.mq.oz>
Organization: Drew University/NJIN
Lines: 48
Posted: Mon Jan 14 17:59:42 1991

In article <1...@macuni.mqcc.mq.oz> ifarq...@sunb.mqcc.mq.oz.au (Ian Farquhar) writes:

> Yes, but it was WordPerfects amazing stupidity that lost money.  Let's
> look at a prime example of how to release a product that nobody will
> loose money:
> 
> a)  Release a product that does not support the user interface of the
>     target machine properly.

They were close enough.  All of WP's versions of WP go by the function
keys, but the Mac, Amiga, ST versions ALSO permit you to use the the
pull-down windows.  I've helped (Amiga only) people get up to speed on
AmigaWP and they didn't have any problem.

> b)  Release an older version of a product when newer versions are being
>     released one other machines.
> c)  Promise updates versions and don't deliver.

Both true... though I think c) is more due to rumors started outside
of the company not coming true.

Your first statement about losing money is not completely correct.  WP
made BIG bucks on AmigaWP when it was first released.  They were often
quoted as paying their development costs in 2 or 3 months.  That's a
great trick.  They lost money when they didn't think before they moved
into Germany.  They heard that there were tons of Amigas in Germany so
they paid big $$$ to translate the manuals, etc.  What they didn't
know (though they could have asked ANYONE) is that piracy is so bad in
Germany, you can't spend big $$$ and still make a profit.  If you're
going to produce products for Germany you have to spend very little
money.  WordPerfect Corp. refuses to do that.  They will only make a
top of the line program with a better-than-top manual.  So, they lost
big.


Tom's big tip for the day:  :-)

"Remember folks, if you want to make money by selling software in
Germany, you have to do a rush job and spend as little as possible.
Sure this means you'll produce total crap and most likely a useless
product, but it's caled Economic Reality.  Software piracy leads to
crappy software."

Tom
-- 
tlimo...@drew.edu     Tom Limoncelli      "Flash!  Flash!  I love you!
tlimo...@drew.bitnet  +1 201 408 5389        ...but we only have fourteen
tlimo...@drew.uucp    limo...@pilot.njin.net       hours to save the earth!"

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Path: gmdzi!unido!mcsun!uunet!cbmvax!cbmehq!cbmger!peterk
From: pet...@cbmger.UUCP (Peter Kittel GERMANY)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.applications
Subject: Re: When will new WordPerfect be available?
Message-ID: <733@cbmger.UUCP>
Date: 15 Jan 91 08:20:43 GMT
References: <1991Jan14.002805.1@ccvax.iastate.edu> 
<1991Jan14.073918.27523@mintaka.lcs.mit.edu> <1991Jan14.092400.10827@marlin.jcu.edu.au> 
<1991Jan14.104559.23914@cunixf.cc.columbia.edu> <91014.113702AXN100@psuvm.psu.edu>
Reply-To: pet...@cbmger.UUCP (Peter Kittel GERMANY)
Organization: Commodore Bueromaschinen GmbH, West Germany
Lines: 25

In article <91014.113702AXN...@psuvm.psu.edu> AXN...@psuvm.psu.edu writes:
>
>  As for Spreadsheets, 123 is the best.  Why because it is the
>standard (please no flames :) ).  Go into any major company and see which
>spredsheet they use, 9 times out of 10 it will be 123.

Speaking of 123, does anyone at all know that the Amiga with a
bridgeboard is THE ULTIMATE platform to run 123??? Proof:
123 knows about a dual monitor mode. You keep your spreadsheet with
all the figures in text mode on one monitor and have the graphics
representation of these figures on another monitor in some graphics
mode. The graphics can be set up a way so that it automatically changes
when the figures change.
ONLY ON THE Amiga you can do this on ONE SINGLE monitor! You
configure 123 for this dual mode, set its graphics up for CGA mode
(well, here the bridgeboard way doesn't shine soooo bright :-) and
open both a mono and a color PC window. If you adjust the sizes of
these windows properly and drag the text screen down, then you can
input your figures at the lower end of your screen and watch the
graphics change accordingly at the top of the screen! This always
makes up for a real good demo on fairs.

-- 
Best regards, Dr. Peter Kittel  // E-Mail to  \\  Only my personal opinions... 
Commodore Frankfurt, Germany  \X/ {uunet|pyramid|rutgers}!cbmvax!cbmger!peterk

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Path: gmdzi!unido!mcsun!uunet!cbmvax!cbmehq!cbmger!peterk
From: pet...@cbmger.UUCP (Peter Kittel GERMANY)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.applications
Subject: Re: When will new WordPerfect be available?
Message-ID: <734@cbmger.UUCP>
Date: 15 Jan 91 08:34:55 GMT
References: <1991Jan14.002805.1@ccvax.iastate.edu> <1092@macuni.mqcc.mq.oz> 
<Jan.14.18.59.41.1991.29710@pilot.njin.net>
Reply-To: pet...@cbmger.UUCP (Peter Kittel GERMANY)
Organization: Commodore Bueromaschinen GmbH, West Germany
Lines: 35

In article <Jan.14.18.59.41.1991.29...@pilot.njin.net> limo...@pilot.njin.net 
(Tom Limoncelli) writes:
>
>Your first statement about losing money is not completely correct.  WP
>made BIG bucks on AmigaWP when it was first released.  They were often
>quoted as paying their development costs in 2 or 3 months.  That's a
>great trick.  They lost money when they didn't think before they moved
>into Germany.  They heard that there were tons of Amigas in Germany so
>they paid big $$$ to translate the manuals, etc.  What they didn't
>know (though they could have asked ANYONE) is that piracy is so bad in
>Germany, you can't spend big $$$ and still make a profit.

Oh, please come on, don't stomp on us this way. It's really
insulting to blame one certain country for things happening everywhere.
In my eyes WP had other problems (at least at that time, don't know
about current status):
1. Quality. WP crashed faster than I could type.
2. Manual. Yes, it was German, but it wasn't very helpfull, in that
   it hid some vital features of the printer drivers from me. So I
   just couldn't get my printer to work properly. Together with
   1. this caused me to flush it from my disk. 
3. Price. A price of ca. 1000 DM for the mentioned quality was
   simply not adequate.

You told correctly that they made good money in the beginning.
Do you also know from whom? Commodore! Commodore Germany bought
lots of packages and lost BIG money because it couldn't sell all.

>Tom's big tip for the day:  :-)

I will not cite it here, because it is too insulting. Please
stop such utterings.

-- 
Best regards, Dr. Peter Kittel  // E-Mail to  \\  Only my personal opinions... 
Commodore Frankfurt, Germany  \X/ {uunet|pyramid|rutgers}!cbmvax!cbmger!peterk

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Path: gmdzi!unido!mcsun!uunet!wuarchive!usc!julius.cs.uiuc.edu!apple!sun-barr!
rutgers!cbmvax!daveh
From: da...@cbmvax.commodore.com (Dave Haynie)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.applications
Subject: Re: When will new WordPerfect be available?
Message-ID: <17621@cbmvax.commodore.com>
Date: 15 Jan 91 19:02:11 GMT
References: <1991Jan14.002805.1@ccvax.iastate.edu> 
<1991Jan14.073918.27523@mintaka.lcs.mit.edu> <1991Jan14.092400.10827@marlin.jcu.edu.au> 
<1991Jan14.104559.23914@cunixf.cc.columbia.edu> <91014.113702AXN100@psuvm.psu.edu>
Reply-To: da...@cbmvax.commodore.com (Dave Haynie)
Organization: Commodore, West Chester, PA
Lines: 38

In article <91014.113702AXN...@psuvm.psu.edu> AXN...@psuvm.psu.edu writes:
>
>     God I hate my self for saying this but, Mark Barret is right about the
>applications in the Amiga world.  Have any of you who are flaming MB tried
>Word or 123?  Word for the MAC is one of the best, if not the best,
>wordprocessors around.  I have tried both Excellence and ProWrite (Yes, the
>latest versions) and still they don't compare to Word.  

What do you want a word processor for anyway?  Real Men write directly in
DTP programs.  Or in markup languages, like TeX or Scribe.  No word processor
is powerful enough.  

>As for Spreadsheets, 123 is the best.  Why because it is the standard (please 
>no flames :) ).  

I shouldn't have to point it out, but that statement is identical to saying
"As for Operating Systems, MS-DOS is the best.  Why, because it is the 
standard".  I don't hear that one, even from PC enthusiasts, all that often.
Being the standard may, in some cases, make something very useful, since it
can tap into lots of work that's been done already.  It is never sufficient
to make it "The Best".  And in many cases, the leader in a field falls
behind in terms of functionality, simply because there's no strong force 
driving any improvements.  If all everyone ever hears is "Spreadsheet == 123",
and its difficult to get any work done in a business environment with any
other spreadsheet, then 123 could be the worst, in terms of actual features,
and still lead the pack.  While its doubtful 123 is the worst, its equally
doubtful that its the best, especially since Lotus themselves has developed
a "better" spreadsheet that's not 123 any more than Gold Disk's or MicroSoft's
spreadsheets are.

>                                             Ajai


-- 
Dave Haynie Commodore-Amiga (Amiga 3000) "The Crew That Never Rests"
   {uunet|pyramid|rutgers}!cbmvax!daveh      PLINK: hazy     BIX: hazy
	"Don't worry, 'bout a thing. 'Cause every little thing, 
	 gonna be alright"		-Bob Marley

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Path: gmdzi!unido!mcsun!uunet!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!uwm.edu!ux1.cso.uiuc.edu!
news.iastate.edu!ccvax.iastate.edu!taab5
From: ta...@ccvax.iastate.edu (Marc Barrett)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.applications
Subject: Re: When will new WordPerfect be available?
Message-ID: <1991Jan15.192859.1@ccvax.iastate.edu>
Date: 16 Jan 91 01:28:59 GMT
Sender: n...@news.iastate.edu (USENET News System)
Lines: 31

In article <17...@cbmvax.commodore.com>, da...@cbmvax.commodore.com (Dave Haynie) 
writes:

> What do you want a word processor for anyway?  Real Men write directly in
> DTP programs.  Or in markup languages, like TeX or Scribe.  No word processor
> is powerful enough.  

   Microsoft Word is, period.  Microsoft Word, in one package, includes 
ALL the tools that you would ever need to typeset a book.  Is that powerful
enough for you?

   MS Word is not really a word processor at all; it is a typesetting
package.  MS Word works like a word processor, but includes many features
-- including style sheets, key glossaries, templates, ability to 
incorporate PostScript in documents, a simple programming langauge
within mail-marge, and a TeX-like mathematical typesetting language --
that are usually only found in dedicated typesetting packages such 
as TeX.  In addition, it has features like a thesaruus and spelling
checker that are found in word processors.  To polish everything off,
it has text and graphic layout features usually only found in DTP
programs.

   In short, I disgree with you.  Real men use Microsoft Word.

> -- 
> Dave Haynie Commodore-Amiga (Amiga 3000) "The Crew That Never Rests"
>    {uunet|pyramid|rutgers}!cbmvax!daveh      PLINK: hazy     BIX: hazy
> 	"Don't worry, 'bout a thing. 'Cause every little thing, 
> 	 gonna be alright"		-Bob Marley


                                 -MB-

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Path: gmdzi!unido!mcsun!uunet!olivea!mintaka!geech.ai.mit.edu!rjc
From: r...@geech.ai.mit.edu (Ray Cromwell)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.applications
Subject: Re: When will new WordPerfect be available?
Message-ID: <1991Jan16.024225.12117@mintaka.lcs.mit.edu>
Date: 16 Jan 91 02:42:25 GMT
References: <1991Jan15.192859.1@ccvax.iastate.edu>
Sender: dae...@mintaka.lcs.mit.edu (Lucifer Maleficius)
Organization: None
Lines: 47

In article <1991Jan15.19285...@ccvax.iastate.edu> ta...@ccvax.iastate.edu 
(Marc Barrett) writes:
>In article <17...@cbmvax.commodore.com>, da...@cbmvax.commodore.com (Dave Haynie) 
writes:
>
>> What do you want a word processor for anyway?  Real Men write directly in
>> DTP programs.  Or in markup languages, like TeX or Scribe.  No word processor
>> is powerful enough.  
>
>   Microsoft Word is, period.  Microsoft Word, in one package, includes 
>ALL the tools that you would ever need to typeset a book.  Is that powerful
>enough for you?
>
>   MS Word is not really a word processor at all; it is a typesetting
>package.  MS Word works like a word processor, but includes many features
>-- including style sheets, key glossaries, templates, ability to 
>incorporate PostScript in documents, a simple programming langauge
>within mail-marge, and a TeX-like mathematical typesetting language --
>that are usually only found in dedicated typesetting packages such 
>as TeX.  In addition, it has features like a thesaruus and spelling
>checker that are found in word processors.  To polish everything off,
>it has text and graphic layout features usually only found in DTP
>programs.
>
>   In short, I disgree with you.  Real men use Microsoft Word.

  Nope, I disagree. Real men program their own word processors in binary
on the fly with a monitor. For layout they use scrap paper!
TeX is, period. Whatever thats supposed to mean. In truth, real men
use what they like, and what they want, not what the 'industry' standard
is.

  For doing school reports, I use a text editor.  Which is better than
a typewriter. Fancy graphics and fonts are ok, but I don't think they are
going to enhance your grade unless your teacher is impressed by bells
and whistles.

dme ram:report
cp report >prt:
There's  simplicity for ya.

>> -- 
>> Dave Haynie Commodore-Amiga (Amiga 3000) "The Crew That Never Rests"
>>    {uunet|pyramid|rutgers}!cbmvax!daveh      PLINK: hazy     BIX: hazy
>> 	"Don't worry, 'bout a thing. 'Cause every little thing, 
>> 	 gonna be alright"		-Bob Marley
>
>
>                                 -MB-

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Path: gmdzi!unido!mcsun!sunic!uupsi!rpi!uwm.edu!psuvax1!psuvm!axn100
From: AXN...@psuvm.psu.edu
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.applications
Subject: Re: When will new WordPerfect be available?
Message-ID: <91016.165528AXN100@psuvm.psu.edu>
Date: 16 Jan 91 21:55:28 GMT
References: <1991Jan14.002805.1@ccvax.iastate.edu>
Organization: Penn State University
Lines: 55



 Dave Haynie wrties:


>What do you want a word processor for anyway?  Real Men write directly in
>DTP programs.  Or in markup languages, like TeX or Scribe.  No word processor
>is powerful enough.
  Because as I stated before, most people do not want to learn a new language
  just to type up a document.  MS Word for the Mac not only allows the power
  user (like yourself) to creat close to DTP documents, while at the same time
  allowing novices to type up quality reports eaisly.  Yes you do not have to
  read the 700 page manual to work Word, just boot up and go.  If someone can
  make a wordprocessor like this or if you, Dave, can convince Microsoft to
  port word over, I would be the first buyer.

>>As for Spreadsheets, 123 is the best.  Why because it is the standard (please
>no flames :) ).

>I shouldn't have to point it out, but that statement is identical to saying
>"As for Operating Systems, MS-DOS is the best.  Why, because it is the
>standard".  I don't hear that one, even from PC enthusiasts, all that often.
>Being the standard may, in some cases, make something very useful, since it
>can tap into lots of work that's been done already.  It is never sufficient
>to make it "The Best".  And in many cases, the leader in a field falls
>behind in terms of functionality, simply because there's no strong force
>driving any improvements.  If all everyone ever hears is "Spreadsheet == 123",
>and its difficult to get any work done in a business environment with any
>other spreadsheet, then 123 could be the worst, in terms of actual features,
>and still lead the pack.  While its doubtful 123 is the worst, its equally
>doubtful that its the best, especially since Lotus themselves has developed
>a "better" spreadsheet that's not 123 any more than Gold Disk's or MicroSoft's
>spreadsheets are.
   The main advantage to 123 2.2 and 3.0 is the ability to make larger
   spread sheets.  The older version of 123 2.01 put most of the info in
   a spreadsheet into the 640 memory, and did not use extended or expanded
   memory very well.  The new version gets around the 640 barrier,  this is
   very important when LAN's are installed into companies.  Additionally, the
   spreadsheets that I have seen that were created with 123 are much more
   powerful than any Excel spreadsheet that I have seen created.  This maybe
   in part due to the users; however, I think that is is because 123 is a
   better program.  Don't get me wrong, I would welcome Excel with open arms
   if were to enter the Amiga market.
                                               Ajai



>-
>Dave Haynie Commodore-Amiga (Amiga 3000) "The Crew That Never Rests"
>   {uunet|pyramid|rutgers}!cbmvax!daveh      PLINK: hazy     BIX: hazy
>        "Don't worry, 'bout a thing. 'Cause every little thing,
>         gonna be alright"              -Bob Marley


                                             Ajai

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Path: gmdzi!unido!mcsun!uunet!spool2.mu.edu!uwm.edu!rutgers!cbmvax!daveh
From: da...@cbmvax.commodore.com (Dave Haynie)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.applications
Subject: Re: When will new WordPerfect be available?
Message-ID: <17738@cbmvax.commodore.com>
Date: 17 Jan 91 17:34:16 GMT
References: <1991Jan15.192859.1@ccvax.iastate.edu>
Reply-To: da...@cbmvax.commodore.com (Dave Haynie)
Organization: Commodore, West Chester, PA
Lines: 61
Posted: Thu Jan 17 11:34:16 1991

In article <1991Jan15.19285...@ccvax.iastate.edu> ta...@ccvax.iastate.edu 
(Marc Barrett) writes:
>In article <17...@cbmvax.commodore.com>, da...@cbmvax.commodore.com (Dave Haynie) 
writes:

>> What do you want a word processor for anyway?  Real Men write directly in
>> DTP programs.  Or in markup languages, like TeX or Scribe.  No word processor
>> is powerful enough.  

>   Microsoft Word is, period.  Microsoft Word, in one package, includes 
>ALL the tools that you would ever need to typeset a book.  Is that powerful
>enough for you?

If I can't write programs in it, it's really not enough.  Which is why I like 
Scribe (one of these days I'll learn TeX, since its on the Amiga) and Emacs.
Typesetting a book is easy, _any_ DTP type program can do that.  Some make it
easier than others.  The goal of a wordprocessor, of course, is one of two
things -- either come close enough to automating all the publishing you would
care to do, or to make writing alone so easy you do all your writing in the
wordprocessor and then load that file into the DTP program.

Now, I haven't used Word, maybe it is good.  I have yet to see any word 
processor on any system that does what I want, though.  First off all, it has
to be a good text editor.  Meaning fast and flexible.  I want to set up the
editing commands as I like them, and that means from the keyboard, Emacs-like.
Any good text editor allows this, even if it's not Emacs (CED, for instance).
I want a good macro capability, with a real programming language like AREXX
or E-Lisp.  I want word abbrevs.  I want active spelling check.

Next comes the formatting part.  It must be 100% WYSIWYG, or I might as well
use a markup language.  Of course it knows about different text environments
(what that call style sheets these days.  It should be able to use graphics,
tables, formulas, etc. as easily as simple text, and text in any font.  Of
course tables, figures, etc. can be attached to any other object, and it's
easy to move them anyway if the wordprocessor decides to put them in the wrong
place.  The rules for such placement should be easily definable, anyway, to
help avoid this.  It should know about headers, sections, subsections, etc. 
and let me define them as I like them, arbitrarily deep.  It should know about
structured documents, so that the guts of my "Chapter 5" in my "Everything 
about the A3000" manual sits in a subfile and also stands alone as the entire
"Zorro III Bus Specification" manual.  Anything externally referenced, such 
as subdocuments and graphics, should know ask for file notification so that 
it can update itself at runtime.  It should know how to handle contents, table, 
and figure pages, index, and bibliography.  The bibliography and footnote style 
should be independent of the entry format, so I can pick IEEE or ACS or 
whatever as I wish.

Well, that's at least scratching the surface.  I know far more folks out there
who've only used wordprocessors, any of them, and are happy with them than 
those who've used TeX or Scribe extensively and have found wordprocessors that
really make them happy.  Unfortunately, if you're in school today, or probably
for the past several years, you're only exposed to wordprocessors.  Which may 
explain why most of the wordprocessors out there are weak compared to markups
which have been around for 10 or 20 years.

>                                 -MB-


-- 
Dave Haynie Commodore-Amiga (Amiga 3000) "The Crew That Never Rests"
   {uunet|pyramid|rutgers}!cbmvax!daveh      PLINK: hazy     BIX: hazy
	"Don't worry, 'bout a thing. 'Cause every little thing, 
	 gonna be alright"		-Bob Marley

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Path: gmdzi!unido!mcsun!uunet!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!uwm.edu!rutgers!cbmvax!daveh
From: da...@cbmvax.commodore.com (Dave Haynie)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.applications
Subject: Spreadsheets... (Was: When will new WordPerfect ...)
Message-ID: <17740@cbmvax.commodore.com>
Date: 17 Jan 91 17:55:53 GMT
References: <1991Jan14.002805.1@ccvax.iastate.edu> <91016.165528AXN100@psuvm.psu.edu>
Reply-To: da...@cbmvax.commodore.com (Dave Haynie)
Organization: Commodore, West Chester, PA
Lines: 49

In article <91016.165528AXN...@psuvm.psu.edu> AXN...@psuvm.psu.edu writes:

>>While its doubtful 123 is the worst, its equally doubtful that its the best,
>>especially since Lotus themselves has developed a "better" spreadsheet that's
>>not 123 any more than Gold Disk's or MicroSoft's spreadsheets are.

>   The main advantage to 123 2.2 and 3.0 is the ability to make larger
>   spread sheets.  The older version of 123 2.01 put most of the info in
>   a spreadsheet into the 640 memory, and did not use extended or expanded
>   memory very well.  The new version gets around the 640 barrier,  this is
>   very important when LAN's are installed into companies.  

Sure, but any limit, other than memory [disk, real] is a silly one.  Just
because something has a silly restriction does not mean that, with the 
restriction removed, that thing is now "the best", or even "good".  Of course,
it's not strictly the authors' fault there, either, they do have this 70's
vintage programming model to work around.  Which just points out that a PClone
is not the proper platform for serious data intensive work.

>   Additionally, the spreadsheets that I have seen that were created with 
>   123 are much more powerful than any Excel spreadsheet that I have seen 
>   created.  

I have seen more powerful programs created with C than with Modula2.  That
says nothing about either language.  It does say something about where I have
been looking.  It doesn't really say much about the folks writing in either
language, either, since the sample set I have to work with is far too small
to be draw statistically valid conclusions from.

>   Don't get me wrong, I would welcome Excel with open arms if were to enter 
>   the Amiga market.

Sure, I would welcome a good spreadsheet for the Amiga.  I used to build timing
models for hardware systems on our VAX based CCALC spreadsheet, back in the
C128 days.  But vowed never to do it again until I could get a spreadsheet
that's really designed to do this correctly.  You really need a sheet with
user-definable cell types for this to work correctly.  I'd be happier with a
special-purpose tool like DV/dt (without the Mac interface) for this kind of
work, though.  But a good enough spreadsheet can do a large variety of jobs,
and on an Amiga, any limit on the number of cells, rows, columns, pages, 
arrays, etc. would be purely articifial, and thus avoided, in any decent
implementation.

>                                               Ajai
-- 
Dave Haynie Commodore-Amiga (Amiga 3000) "The Crew That Never Rests"
   {uunet|pyramid|rutgers}!cbmvax!daveh      PLINK: hazy     BIX: hazy
	"Don't worry, 'bout a thing. 'Cause every little thing, 
	 gonna be alright"		-Bob Marley