From: M.E.Bennun@CEN.EX.AC.UK
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.notabene
Subject: Typewriter mode lockup
Date: 16 Dec 92 17:42:44 GMT
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Via:        UK.AC.EX.CEN; 16 DEC 92 17:42:27 GMT
X-Mailer:   ELM [version 2.3 PL0]

I have just inserted some text on a form by using typewriter mode. The
PC sent it to the printer alright, but then locked up. Twice.

Has anyone else had this experience?


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

I want to be frank; I mean no harm, but I'd like to know the
experience and views of others and I want to say what's on my mind.

I think that a package can and should be pretty close to perfect in
the sense that no command or feature it offers should fail in normal
use; and "normal" may be pretty exotic - someone may want, for
example, to index a mailmerge file.... I know this example well - I
did it with NB3 and I'm proud of the book that emerged. The system was
not designed for the purpose, but it did it.  I'm sure we can all
think of equally grisly tasks we've asked NB to do successfully, and
if the designers heard of them they'd wince. They are typical of the
imaginative sort of thing that a bunch of academics can think up to
cope with the problems of under-funding (making a package you have do
what one you don't want to buy is designed to do) and esoteric needs.
When the package is essentially a good one, one expects reliability at
every point; and when you throw in something like XPL programming,
then the designers must expect people to really push it hard.

I cannot accept the "deprovements" (was that the word?) in silence. I
LIKE THE DESIGN OF V. 4; but I don't think there is such a thing as a
buglet or even a midge: if I once could but now can't put a string of
hard spaces on the action line, I have a problem; if I have to use two
keystrokes to find a label when I used one, I have a problem (it's an
absolute mess on a laptop, because one has to use the Fn key to turn
the number-pad on); if it crashes when I use typewriter mode when once
it didn't, I have a problem; if I can't write to nbcustom.set __every
time__ I have a problem; if it's more complicated (when once it was
simple) to upper-case or lower-case or capitalise, then I have a
problem. There are so many lovely new features in v. 4; but why has
NBI made changes which are not improvements? I can accept an
explanation to the effect that things like not getting a string of
spaces to the action line will be set right when the fix disks come
round - I can see this as an "oooh, errr... we goofed there - sorry
folks!" situation; but this is not the case with, for example, a
decision to change simple key designations for more complex ones.

I have been using NB for - oh, I can't recall. Ten years?? What was
the date of v. 1? I can't find the disks any more (five 5.25" 360K
floppies, to give an idea how the size of the package has increased).
I was one of the very first at this university to use NB v. 1, and we
were probably the first users in the UK; and I've been through v.2, v.
3 and v. 3.1 (which latter gave me some skinned knuckles).  This is
the first time I respond with unease and doubts to a new version.
Previously, new versions were unqualified improvements; now I find
myself mourning the loss of features.

Fellow Notabeneri, I am uneasy.

The Great Dragonfly has served me well in the past; but can I now urge
my hesitating colleagues, users of WP mostly, to spend departmental
money on v. 4 when those who are using v. 3 don't have such problems
as I read about and encounter myself?

Am I alone? One thing which makes me hestitate is the way in which so
many people whom I will quite possibly never see have, with humour,
skill, and resourcefulness helped me so often. They prove the quality
of v.  3, because they were showing how the package could be made to
extend itself. When those same people try to do the same with v. 4, I
feel I might be the odd man out....
 ---------------
Mervyn E. Bennun, Law Department, University of Exeter
Phone: (+44) (0) 392 263 161
Postal Address: Amory Building, Rennes Drive, Exeter EX4 4RJ, Devon, U.K.
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Subject: (no subject given)