From: rick@sjsumcs.sjsu.edu (Richard M. Warner)
Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.apps
Subject: Re: WP for Windows or Word?
Date: 17 Aug 92 17:54:10 GMT
Organization: San Jose State University, Math & CS

In article <0095F13C.2CF87560@srcvax.cem.msu.edu> medlin@srcvax.cem.msu.edu (Stephen Medlin) writes:
>From: medlin@srcvax.cem.msu.edu (Stephen Medlin)
>Subject: Re: WP for Windows or Word?
>Date: 14 Aug 92 13:27:08 GMT
>In article <1992Aug13.162152.5826@news.nd.edu>,
>rwilliam@mozart.helios.nd.edu (richard williams) writes: 
>>>without too much trouble. However, I was astonished to see that WordPerfect
>>>for windows looked more like a character based program than a WYSIWYG one.
>>
>>Most reviewers seem to prefer WinWOrd.  Even though I have both it and
>>WpWin, I have stuck with WpWin because Winword is nowhere near as good
>>at converting my WP files as it claims to be.  But, while Winword
>>may be the better program, WpWin isn't as bad as it seemed.  Especially
>>if you make good use of the ruler, it is easy to pick fonts and font sizes.
>>On the pulldown menus, the Font option lets you choose fonts, font sizes,
>>bold, etc.  If you use truetype fonts and the Windows printer drivers,
>>you should get a very good (even perfect) match between screen and
>>printer.  There is a draft mode (maybe you were in it) that speeds up
>>editing but looks much like the dos version.
>> 
>>So, there may be be many good reasons for going with WinWord, but I
>>don't think Wysiwyg capabilities is one of them.
>>--
>
>Just a quick comment.  Richard is correct about the reviewers.  I just 
>wanted to let you know that there was a fairly recent review of Win 
>word processors in PC Mag. (Feb. 25, 1992 11(4), pp.113-174).  Just to 
>quote a couple of lines from their review:
>
>     The best parts of WordPerfect for Windows are those that were written 
>     for Windows, such as the program's innovative file management feature 
>     and its button bar.  Evertything in the package that works like the 
>     DOS version seems awkaward, including its unzoomable editing screen, 
>     its inability to let you edit a full-page image, its incomplete use of 
>     fonts and similar products, and its code-based formatting that seems 
>     awkard and archaic in a GUI environment.  (p. 116)
>
>I am a WinWord user, but I have used WP4Dos personally and seen WP4Win 
>in use.  I felt like WP4Win was a bit immature (which it is since this 
>is the first version out whereas Ami and WFW are in their 2nd 
>versions).  I haven't tried it, but WFW included a WP emulation.  
>These are just my opinions.  It would be nice if a WP user would
>comment on the quote above, since I've found some inconsistencies in 
>other reviews of products that I use (e.g., some feature claimed to be 
>missing is often available but buried under another menu or requires 
>something special to do).

First, a correction.  Ami is on its 4th version:  Ami -> Ami Pro 1 ->
AP 2 -> AP 4.  W4W in on its third version: 1.0 -> 1.1 -> 2.0.

Second, the WP emulation in W4W is nowhere near as good as the MS
ads claim.  Many inconsistencies.

Third, some of the things in the above quote that the review rags on
are because *WP decided to continue to support their installed customer
base (DOS and Mac) and not screw them over when moving to Windows, like
MS did.  MS W4W 1.0 was completely incompatible with MS Word 4 and 5.
The menus and keystrokes were entirely different, file and macro formats
were entirely different, and the half-a**ed filters that MS provided 
for compatibility did NOT work most of the time.  And, until W4W 2.0
and Word for Mac 5.0, the Mac and Windows versions were not very
compatible.  The only major incompatibility between WP4W and WP for DOS
is with the macros.  In all fairness, the filter for converting the 
DOS macros is not all that great.

WP has set the goal of making their programs file, and as far as
possible, keystroke compatible between platforms.  That means that
WP on MVS and WP on Windows create similar files.  The MS way is
to say 'to hell with inter-platform compatibility'.  If you want to
run one word-processor across multiple platforms (mainframes, minis,
DOS, Windows, Macs, UNIX, OS/2), WordPerfect is the ONLY game in
town.