L
Leon Manfredi
WordPerfect...... Hell I remember that from the Dark Ages, since after Q&A, both
of which I still have buried under somewhere about here.
of which I still have buried under somewhere about here.
C
choro
Oh boy! Moot point or mute point, mute issue and moot issue. Don't knowOn 25/02/2012 18:15, Ken Blake wrote:
But really what is the best word processor is a mute issue. The question
is how many people use that format and would other people be able to see
what you have done if you send them a word document in that format?
I don't think it's a mute [sic] issue at all. I use WordPerfect for my
own documents, not for what I send to others. I really don't care what
word processor someone else uses. And if I want to send a WordPerfect
document to someone else, I would normally use WordPerfect to create a
pdf file that I would send to them.
how I came to spell it as mute which is rather unusual though not
exactly a mistake. Still, I apologize.
But why use some software that very few people have access to in the
first place? I can understand people using OpenOffice or LibreOffice but
using WordPerfect in this day and age is a bit weird to my way of
thinking. Not if it were a freebie, I'd understand it. But it's not.
It's Corel software now, isn't it? I recently saw Lotus Suite 9.8 going
for under well under £20 inc. 20% VAT, the tax from hell, which would
make it around $20 or less. I used to get it just for the calendar but
now there is Google Calendar for free. But these days you can get MS
Office Academic version for quite a reasonable sum and install it on 3
machines which works out at a very reasonable price for families.
-- choro
C
choro
It is not likes and dislikes but rather what you have got used to.
-- choro
-- choro
W
Wolf K
On 25/02/2012 8:21 PM, choro wrote:
[...]
Yes, and last I heard, MS owns a chunk of Corel. This may explain why at
present WP reads and writes more formats than MS and Open Office. That's
why I use it. Not that this matters much. For text-only docs, *.rtf is a
universal format. If you include images, convert to PDF.
HTH
Wolf K.
[...]
[...]But why use some software that very few people have access to in the
first place? I can understand people using OpenOffice or LibreOffice but
using WordPerfect in this day and age is a bit weird to my way of
thinking. Not if it were a freebie, I'd understand it. But it's not.
It's Corel software now, isn't it?
Yes, and last I heard, MS owns a chunk of Corel. This may explain why at
present WP reads and writes more formats than MS and Open Office. That's
why I use it. Not that this matters much. For text-only docs, *.rtf is a
universal format. If you include images, convert to PDF.
HTH
Wolf K.
J
Jeff Layman
On 25/02/2012 19:49, choro wrote:
(snip)
Even MS eventually gave in and tried to replicate the "Reveal codes"
facility, which was WordPerfect's greatest strength. You could receive
a complex document from someone else and see exactly how it had been
produced.
I used WordPro for a while, but that Lotus program was very unstable and
regularly crashed, bringing Windows down with it. Also, AFAIR, it used
a strange database format which no other wordprocessor could read. It
also led to another problem (see comment under LibreOffice below).
problem, as has been stated many times in various threads here, is that
reading, editing, and saving files opened in one format is fine for the
native program, but if you use a filter you are going to end up with
something unexpected, that eventually neither program will be able to
make full sense of.
The main issue I have with LibreOffice (or should that be with ODT
files?) is the same issue I had with WordPro. If the file gets
corrupted, and cannot be opened in the wordprocessor program, you are
royally screwed (ok, you /should/ have had a backup...) as there is
nothing you can do to get back the text. That doesn't happen with Word
or WordPerfect files. With those, at least you can get back the
(unformatted) text by opening the file in a text editor like notepad,
ignoring all the formatting junk, and copying/pasting all the text to
the wordprocessor. True, it would mean a lot of work to get the
document reformatted into a readable state, but you would not have lost
all the data in that file.
(snip)
WordPerfect 5.1 was (is?) far and away the best wordprocessing program.I did use both WordPerfect in its DOS days, and I think I used it under
Windows 3.1 as well for a short while. I also used Lotus Suite and can
tell you that its WordPro was lovely to work with. In fact I might try
installing it yet again on my new machine in case I want to open some 10
to 15 year old files I have got somewhere. I have the installation CD
somewhere. But where?
Even MS eventually gave in and tried to replicate the "Reveal codes"
facility, which was WordPerfect's greatest strength. You could receive
a complex document from someone else and see exactly how it had been
produced.
I used WordPro for a while, but that Lotus program was very unstable and
regularly crashed, bringing Windows down with it. Also, AFAIR, it used
a strange database format which no other wordprocessor could read. It
also led to another problem (see comment under LibreOffice below).
I believe that you can get a Word filter to open ODT files. But theBut honestly, OpenOffice and its variant LibreOffice are so good that if
I hadn't already had MS Office, I wouldn't have minded using that and
saving or converting word files in or to MS Word format if I wanted to
send them to someone who does not have Open or LibreOffice installed on
their machine.
But can MS Office read or save files in OpenOffice/LibreOffice or other
formats? And it costs a lot of money. I am surprised that the use of
OpenOffice is not more widespread.
problem, as has been stated many times in various threads here, is that
reading, editing, and saving files opened in one format is fine for the
native program, but if you use a filter you are going to end up with
something unexpected, that eventually neither program will be able to
make full sense of.
The main issue I have with LibreOffice (or should that be with ODT
files?) is the same issue I had with WordPro. If the file gets
corrupted, and cannot be opened in the wordprocessor program, you are
royally screwed (ok, you /should/ have had a backup...) as there is
nothing you can do to get back the text. That doesn't happen with Word
or WordPerfect files. With those, at least you can get back the
(unformatted) text by opening the file in a text editor like notepad,
ignoring all the formatting junk, and copying/pasting all the text to
the wordprocessor. True, it would mean a lot of work to get the
document reformatted into a readable state, but you would not have lost
all the data in that file.
W
Wolf K
On 26/02/2012 5:43 AM, Jeff Layman wrote:
[...]
near-clones of MS Office as is legal to make. Horrible programs, all of
them. I do use them, but usually just to open a *.doc file (eg news
letter) that I want to print as is. I use WordPerfect X5, which AFAIK
opens, reads, and writes more formats than any other word-proc. One
really nice thing about WordPerfect is that it's totally backward
compatible. You can change the interface to earlier versions, even 5.1
if you're feeling excessively nostalgic. ;-). FWIW, I distribute all
text-only docs in *.RTF, which can be read correctly by every program
(it's really just plain-text plus a bit of font formatting). But to
ensure your doc will be readable exactly as you wrote it, you have to
convert to PDF. Trouble is, PDF files can be very large, especially if
they include images.
The main issue I have with word-processing in general is that there are
no standards. *.odt is a good idea, but only the open software people
and IBM take it seriously. IBM has had real problems expanding its
word-proc market share, IMO mostly because they (still) haven't
understood the power of the individual user on the computer market,
which has increased as laptops and pads have proliferated. Now that
there's an Ubuntu version that will run on an Android phone, individual
consumer choices will matter even more. IMO, the focus in enterprise
computing will shift from "What's the best price/performance ratio IT
system we can install?" to "How do we ensure security, now that we have
to let all our employees have at least some remote access from their
phones?"
People don't want to have different stuff at the office and at home,
especially if they are expected to work both places. While word-proc
software was still primarily business software, WordPerfect and Lotus
ruled. As soon as MS bundled its early versions of Word (later Office)
with Windows for consumer use, the pressure to shift to Word/Office
increased. So MS's *.doc has become a de facto standard.
It's bizarre. It's as if car makers each built cars with different
control systems and arrangements: you'd have to "convert" your driving
habits to another system every time you drove a car built by another
manufacturer. Oh yeah, that's how it was with cars back in the 1880s and
1890s. IOW, computing is still an emergent technology.
Just my morning rant.
Have a good day,
Wolf K.
[...]
The main issue I have with Open/Libre Office is that they are asThe main issue I have with LibreOffice (or should that be with ODT
files?) is the same issue I had with WordPro. If the file gets
corrupted, and cannot be opened in the wordprocessor program, you are
royally screwed (ok, you /should/ have had a backup...) as there is
nothing you can do to get back the text. That doesn't happen with Word
or WordPerfect files. With those, at least you can get back the
(unformatted) text by opening the file in a text editor like notepad,
ignoring all the formatting junk, and copying/pasting all the text to
the wordprocessor. True, it would mean a lot of work to get the
document reformatted into a readable state, but you would not have lost
all the data in that file.
near-clones of MS Office as is legal to make. Horrible programs, all of
them. I do use them, but usually just to open a *.doc file (eg news
letter) that I want to print as is. I use WordPerfect X5, which AFAIK
opens, reads, and writes more formats than any other word-proc. One
really nice thing about WordPerfect is that it's totally backward
compatible. You can change the interface to earlier versions, even 5.1
if you're feeling excessively nostalgic. ;-). FWIW, I distribute all
text-only docs in *.RTF, which can be read correctly by every program
(it's really just plain-text plus a bit of font formatting). But to
ensure your doc will be readable exactly as you wrote it, you have to
convert to PDF. Trouble is, PDF files can be very large, especially if
they include images.
The main issue I have with word-processing in general is that there are
no standards. *.odt is a good idea, but only the open software people
and IBM take it seriously. IBM has had real problems expanding its
word-proc market share, IMO mostly because they (still) haven't
understood the power of the individual user on the computer market,
which has increased as laptops and pads have proliferated. Now that
there's an Ubuntu version that will run on an Android phone, individual
consumer choices will matter even more. IMO, the focus in enterprise
computing will shift from "What's the best price/performance ratio IT
system we can install?" to "How do we ensure security, now that we have
to let all our employees have at least some remote access from their
phones?"
People don't want to have different stuff at the office and at home,
especially if they are expected to work both places. While word-proc
software was still primarily business software, WordPerfect and Lotus
ruled. As soon as MS bundled its early versions of Word (later Office)
with Windows for consumer use, the pressure to shift to Word/Office
increased. So MS's *.doc has become a de facto standard.
It's bizarre. It's as if car makers each built cars with different
control systems and arrangements: you'd have to "convert" your driving
habits to another system every time you drove a car built by another
manufacturer. Oh yeah, that's how it was with cars back in the 1880s and
1890s. IOW, computing is still an emergent technology.
Just my morning rant.
Have a good day,
Wolf K.
J
John Williamson
Make that every car you buy. Some makers even swap sides for things likeWolf said:On 26/02/2012 5:43 AM, Jeff Layman wrote:
It's bizarre. It's as if car makers each built cars with different
control systems and arrangements: you'd have to "convert" your driving
habits to another system every time you drove a car built by another
manufacturer.
the indicators and wipers between models.
W
Wolf K
Yup, you're right, it's silly that these these "minor" controls vary soMake that every car you buy. Some makers even swap sides for things like
the indicators and wipers between models.
much.
Wolf K.
K
Ken Blake
WordPerfect...... Hell I remember that from the Dark Ages, since after Q&A, bothOn 25/02/2012 18:15, Ken Blake wrote:
I'm in the minority these days, but I think WordPerfect is far and
away the best choice available.
But really what is the best word processor is a mute issue. The question
is how many people use that format and would other people be able to see
what you have done if you send them a word document in that format?
I don't think it's a mute [sic] issue at all. I use WordPerfect for my
own documents, not for what I send to others. I really don't care what
word processor someone else uses. And if I want to send a WordPerfect
document to someone else, I would normally use WordPerfect to create a
pdf file that I would send to them.
of which I still have buried under somewhere about here.
Your choice entirely. I'm not trying to convince you of anything.
K
Ken Blake
Oh boy! Moot point or mute point, mute issue and moot issue. Don't knowOn 25/02/2012 18:15, Ken Blake wrote:
I'm in the minority these days, but I think WordPerfect is far and
away the best choice available.
But really what is the best word processor is a mute issue. The question
is how many people use that format and would other people be able to see
what you have done if you send them a word document in that format?
I don't think it's a mute [sic] issue at all. I use WordPerfect for my
own documents, not for what I send to others. I really don't care what
word processor someone else uses. And if I want to send a WordPerfect
document to someone else, I would normally use WordPerfect to create a
pdf file that I would send to them.
how I came to spell it as mute which is rather unusual though not
exactly a mistake. Still, I apologize.
No problem. ;-) I was just pulling your leg slightly.
But why use some software that very few people have access to in the
first place? I can understand people using OpenOffice or LibreOffice but
using WordPerfect in this day and age is a bit weird to my way of
thinking.
That's fine. You're welcome to think it's weird; we don't have to have
the same opinion.
Not if it were a freebie, I'd understand it. But it's not.
I run the latest version, X5, which I got for free (quite legally, by
the way). But I don't use it because it was free; I use it because in
my view it's far and away the best choice. If I had needed to pay for
it, I would have.
It's Corel software now, isn't it?
Yes.
But these days you can get MS
Office Academic version for quite a reasonable sum and install it on 3
machines which works out at a very reasonable price for families.
Again, I greatly prefer WordPerfect, and would gladly pay more for it
than Word. But note that I don't prefer the other programs in the
WordPerfect Office Suite; for those I prefer the Microsoft Office
programs.
K
Ken Blake
Yes, and last I heard, MS owns a chunk of Corel.
Not as far as I know. But if that's correct and you have a reference
to it, I'd like to see it. Can you provide a URL?
K
Ken Blake
It is not likes and dislikes but rather what you have got used to.
Well, I agree that what you have gotten used to is a factor--even a
big factor. But I don't at all think it's the only factor. Likes and
dislikes are even more important, in my view.
K
Ken Blake
WordPerfect 5.1 was (is?) far and away the best wordprocessing program.
I'm glad to see that somebody here has the same views of WordPerfect
as I do, even if you are talking about a very old version
But have you seen the more recent versions? Do you really think that
5.1 was better than X5? I certainly don't.
K
Ken Blake
I use WordPerfect X5, which AFAIK
opens, reads, and writes more formats than any other word-proc. One
really nice thing about WordPerfect is that it's totally backward
compatible. You can change the interface to earlier versions, even 5.1
if you're feeling excessively nostalgic. ;-).
Another WordPerfect love! Glad you also feel that way.
FWIW, I distribute all
text-only docs in *.RTF, which can be read correctly by every program
(it's really just plain-text plus a bit of font formatting).
I distribute very little text, but if I do, I also often use rtf. For
some people, I'll send it to them in .doc or .docs (I have Office 2010
installed here too).
But to
ensure your doc will be readable exactly as you wrote it, you have to
convert to PDF. Trouble is, PDF files can be very large, especially if
they include images.
Yes, that's very true. And of course pdf files are not readily
editable, and that can sometimes be an issue.
People don't want to have different stuff at the office and at home,
especially if they are expected to work both places. While word-proc
software was still primarily business software, WordPerfect and Lotus
ruled. As soon as MS bundled its early versions of Word (later Office)
with Windows for consumer use, the pressure to shift to Word/Office
increased. So MS's *.doc has become a de facto standard.
In my view, what happened was that WordPerfect 6.0 was a bug-laden
release. Up until that point, WordPerfect was not only preferred by
many amateurs, but was also the standard of the great majority of law
offices. But with all those bugs, and the time it took to come out
with 6.1 fixing them, most of those law offices (and many others)
moved to Word. And they never came back. Word has had the great
majority of customers since then.
J
Jeff Layman
I vaguely remember someone showing me 6.0. I stayed with 5.1...I'm glad to see that somebody here has the same views of WordPerfect
as I do, even if you are talking about a very old version
But have you seen the more recent versions? Do you really think that
5.1 was better than X5? I certainly don't.
Never seen anything later. X5 looks good on paper, but I don't have a
need for anything so sophisticated now.
Just out of interest, a few years ago I tried running 5.1 on my Athlon
1800+ XP machine. I think you could say it was quite fast. As a test,
It had "searched and replaced" something like "the" for "and" in a long
document almost as soon as I hit the enter key!
W
...winston
"Wolf K" wrote in message
Yes, and last I heard, MS owns a chunk of Corel. This may explain why at
present WP reads and writes more formats than MS and Open Office. That's
why I use it. Not that this matters much. For text-only docs, *.rtf is a
universal format. If you include images, convert to PDF.
HTH
Wolf K.You're recollection, correct at one time is slightly off (by a few years)
- Microsoft sold its interest in Corel in 2003 for ~$12.5 million.
Today, Corel is solely owned by Corel Holdings a limited partnership controlled by an affiliate of Vector Capital. (fyi-last month
Corel acquired Roxio)
Yes, and last I heard, MS owns a chunk of Corel. This may explain why at
present WP reads and writes more formats than MS and Open Office. That's
why I use it. Not that this matters much. For text-only docs, *.rtf is a
universal format. If you include images, convert to PDF.
HTH
Wolf K.You're recollection, correct at one time is slightly off (by a few years)
- Microsoft sold its interest in Corel in 2003 for ~$12.5 million.
Today, Corel is solely owned by Corel Holdings a limited partnership controlled by an affiliate of Vector Capital. (fyi-last month
Corel acquired Roxio)
K
Ken Blake
I vaguely remember someone showing me 6.0. I stayed with 5.1...
6.0 was a disaster. It was laden with bugs.
Never seen anything later. X5 looks good on paper, but I don't have a
need for anything so sophisticated now.
OK, that's fine. I'm not trying to talk you into getting a later
version. But please note that the statement "I don't have a need for
anything so sophisticated now" is a *very* different one from
"WordPerfect 5.1 was (is?) far and away the best wordprocessing
program." Yes, but 5.1 was good, but the versions have been getting
better and better all the time.
M
mechanic
Gotta love this group, first it was discussing usenet top/bottomWordPerfect...... Hell I remember that from the Dark Ages, since
after Q&A, both of which I still have buried under somewhere
about here.
posting styles, then in a discussion on word processors someone
talks of WordPerfect! So 1980s! (Yes I know it's still being sold,
at a price!)
M
mechanic
Ah Frame! Pity there's no Linux version, or even a Windows cut downWe got hooked on FrameMaker/FrameBuilder, when doing 500-1000 page
"books". So that was a choice, based on the perception of
performance at the time.
version for non-commercial use...
L
Loony
This is the weirdest setup I have ever experienced. I have downloadedWhy bother with Works?
Libre Office is so much better........
the portable version and there are 7 different programs.
I have been watching Task Manager and as soon as my Explorer mouse
reaches the file where the LibreOffice(Portable) has the 7 programs, the
LibreOffice immediately appears in 'Windows Task Manager' under
Applications. When I try to open one of the 7 programs, there is a
message that a LibreOffice is already running. I close that one and the
other disappears too. How screwy is this?
Is there a way out of this mess, short of deleting 6 of the 7.
TIA
Ask a Question
Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?
You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments. After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.