Talk:Comparison of word processors

message: The formats table is incorrect, because OpenOffice can not read or write RTF files ... correctly. Broken support is the same as no support. To test this, try to save a simple ODF doc to RTF and try to open this RTF on Wordpad or Word for example. Or vice-versa (open on OpenOffice one RTF created on Wordpad or Word).  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 200.189.118.10 (talk) 16:24, 25 January 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  OpenOffice cannot write or read RTF 

message: This article was in serious need of improvement and progress- I have not bothered to check the facts that are already on the article, I am just going with them (although the requirements that are listed don't seem quite correct):
I think that the following comparison tables should be included:
*General Info (creator, first release, latest stable version, cost, license)
*Characteristics ( spellcheck, grammar check, image editing, mail merging)
*Import File Type Compatibility (.odt, .doc, .abw... list more please)
*Export File Type Compatibility (above)
*Operating System Compatibility (Windows, Mac OSX, GNU/Linux, BSD, Unix, Open VMS, BeOS/Zeta, MorphOS, eComStation... add more if necessary)
Add more if you think that they are necessary!
*update: I added GI and Characteristics. Commence the filling in! Smartalecks 16:13, 8 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Tables/Comparison 

message: I think word processors should also include HTML editing because otherwise it's just another text editor and there is already a page for the pursose of comparison of text editors. The purpose of this page is to provide more insight into word processors or very advanced text editors. Here we're talking about more features and advantages that a text editor does not have.--Nadyes 21:09, 25 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I have no problem with mentioning HTML editing, but historically it is not a criterion for something being a word processor. Word processors as opposed to text editors predate HTML by a long time. Surely WordStar, MS Word in the 1980s, WordPerfect in the 1980s, as well as batch word processors such as Troff, Scribe, and TeX, were word processors, yet none of them provided HTML editing. Some of them still don't. The distinction between a text editor and a word processor is the finer control of graphical detail that a word processor provides. Word processors often come with other facilities, such as HTML editing and spelling correction, but these are not part of the definition.Bill 22:32, 25 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  HTML 

message: WTH? This is a list, not a comparison. The article should be renamed or merged. ~~Anonymous User Dude
:Judging from both the content and the comments by Nadyes, what it actually is is a presentation of a few peoples' ideas of what a word processor SHOULD be. As such, it might be an acceptable blog post or business proposal, but it doesn't belong in an encyclopedia at all. I think it should be deleted.Bill 00:03, 27 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree, especially since there already is the List of word processors. Anybody have time to put it up for deletion? Mütze 18:48, 8 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Deletion was just discussed but defeated. There was, I think, consensus that as it stands the article isn't good, but those opposing deletion were of the view that since there COULD be a good article on this topic, it should not be deleted. Unfortunately, there doesn't seem to be anybody who wants to take the trouble to make it into a good article.Bill 19:01, 8 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: This is not a comparison

message: Please see Comparison of text editors for the standard that needs to be aimed for.
Tyrenius 02:59, 27 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Improvement

message: A think the best definition I can think of for a word-processing program is a text editor that is WYSIWYG and geared toward producing documents to be printed. Theshibboleth 07:59, 4 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Defintion of Word Processor 

message: I don't think OOo has a grammar check. it does have spell check though. please verify. --165.230.46.78 23:07, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  OpenOffice.org Writer Grammar check? 

message: Whether or not different file types are supported should be included e.g., .doc, .odt, .txt., .rtf, etc. --70.111.218.254 03:25, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  file type support 

message: According to the history "Den fjättrade ankan" removed the import/export details about KWord ( http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Comparison_of_word_processors&diff=91145318&oldid=90504679 ). Why? I reverted it cause it does not make sense to have them for all apps except for KWord.
:No, I have not removed anything. There never were any entries for KWord for these. Den fjättrade ankan 11:43, 2 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  KWord Import/Export 

message: The recent additions of several programs is great.  I hope that stubs for the redlinks can be started.  Do people know about RoughDraft?  It has been deleted twice for spam.  And Evermore Software (creator of Evermore Integrated Office) was deleted after being PRODed.  Do these belong in this table? --Karnesky 19:45, 30 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Notability of red linked packages 

message: Need some explanation of how AbiWord "partially" supports PDF as the ref link is dead. --Britcom 09:34, 27 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Abiword's PDF export support seems limited to suggesting the use of a third party PDF printer driver on Windows, use Mac's built-in PDF print option, and I'm not sure how it suggests it on Linux - it starts of by saying there are 'a number of options'.  Source: . 203.217.94.116 (talk) 14:33, 28 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  AbiWord - PDF 

message: Abiword's export to Word is limited to using RTF format with a .DOC extension ().  Such a capability is covered adequately by the "RTF" column, so a "Yes" in the "Word" column should denote more than just RTF capability. If we give AbiWord a "Yes" to export in Word format, then we would need to give a Yes to every word processor capable of outputting RTF, for it would be quite possible to export from any RTF application, saving it with a .DOC extension and open it in Word.  203.217.94.116 (talk) 15:01, 28 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: We should probably replace "Word" with "Word DOC" and/or OOXML-DOCX for clarity. --Karnesky (talk) 17:03, 28 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  AbiWord - Word export 

message: Need some explanation on what constitutes "XML" import.  I'd be inclined to remove that column entirely, as XML isn't a file format and it confuses the issue - does this mean "at least one of the input formats it supports is based on XML"?  203.217.94.116 (talk) 14:36, 28 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I think it means the ability to import a file with a .xml extension in Windows. But I guess the extension means different types of files to different programs, right? I'd be OK if the column were removed if you think it's inaccurate.--Hello. I'm new here, but I'm sure I can help out. (talk) 18:18, 28 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  XML Import - what does this mean 

message: After a thorough comparison between the two articles i have noticed that the two articles can be merged with certain modifications helping this article to attain a good standard, I request editors to come forward and comment on this notification. Edeskonline (talk) 14:30, 16 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Merge with [[List of word processors]]

message: TextEdit currently has "no" to export in PDF, but like spelling and grammar (which it has listed as "yes"), PDF exporting is provided as part of OS X when going File > Print; shouldn't it therefore be labelled as having the ability to create PDFs? Robert (talk) 17:48, 7 December 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  TextEdit: PDF export 

message: The image :File:Appleworks-6.0-wordproc-mac.png is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here.  In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page.  Please check
:* That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
:* That this article is linked to from the image description page.
The following images also have this problem:
*:File:Corel WordPerfect X3 Reveal Codes screenshot.png
*:File:WordPerfectX3.png
*:File:WordPad Vista.png
*:File:Word Pro.png
*:File:StarOffice Writer.png
*:File:MS Word 2007.png
*:File:Ichitaro 2006 screenshot.jpg
*:      File:Hangul 2007.jpg
This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --15:45, 6 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Image copyright problem with File:Appleworks-6.0-wordproc-mac.png

message: WordPad is absent from every comparison table, though it's as much a word processor as OSX's TextEdit (bundled and pretty basic, but often good enough). Furthermore in 7 it gained r/w for both Office Open XML (docx) and Open Document Text (odt) formats. Shouldn't it be added to the 4 comparison tables? Masklinn (talk) 13:16, 26 October 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  WordPad 

message: Does any other word processor have a feature that compares to Reveal Codes? I haven't used WordPerfect myself for years, but with the push for OpenDocument format and XML, I would expect more word processors to implement such features. I wonder if anyone else feels that a column should be added to indicate that the word processor has or doesn't have a Reveal Codes-like feature. D. F. Schmidt (talk) 02:26, 7 November 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  WordPerfect Reveal Codes 

message: Someone should add this, but I don't have the appropriate expertise..  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.149.67.183 (talk) 16:24, 5 February 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Google Docs =

message: I don't want to be anal here, but LaTeX isn't a word processor. 66.183.50.162 (talk) 02:31, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't see anywhere on the page where it is listed as being a word processor: it is listed as a file format and some word processors that use LaTeX are listed.  --Karnesky (talk) 17:12, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  LaTeX 

message: An image used in this article, , has been nominated for speedy deletion at Wikimedia Commons for the following reason: Copyright violations 
;What should I do?
Don't panic; deletions can take a little longer at Commons than they do on Wikipedia. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion (although please review Commons guidelines before doing so). The best way to contest this form of deletion is by posting on the image talk page.
* If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use)
* If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used.
* If the image has already been deleted you may want to try Commons Undeletion Request
This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 09:44, 19 October 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: File:Lotus Symphony Document 3.0B2.png Nominated for speedy Deletion

message: An image used in this article, , has been nominated for speedy deletion at Wikimedia Commons for the following reason: Copyright violations 
;What should I do?
Don't panic; deletions can take a little longer at Commons than they do on Wikipedia. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion (although please review Commons guidelines before doing so). The best way to contest this form of deletion is by posting on the image talk page.
* If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use)
* If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used.
* If the image has already been deleted you may want to try Commons Undeletion Request
To take part in any discussion, or to review a more detailed deletion rationale please visit the relevant 
This is Bot placed notification, another user has nominated/tagged the image --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 20:03, 22 March 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: File:Libreoffice writer .png Nominated for speedy Deletion

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Comparison of word processors. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20100728171705/http://www.koffice.org:80/news/koffice-2-2-released/ to http://www.koffice.org/news/koffice-2-2-released/
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 07:08, 15 January 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Is KWord or Calligra Words being compared here? Because I'd like to change all occurrences of KWord to to be seen as and feel like Words. 71.217.64.96 (talk) 06:22, 23 April 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  KWord 

message: I've never edited Wikipedia before, but that just kinda bugged me.
https://www.macrumors.com/2017/03/27/apple-updates-iwork-software-suite/
Bigboss171 (talk) 14:38, 27 July 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pages now has math support without extensions. 

message: Since MobiSystems OfficeSuite is in the list at the bottom of the article & it has its own article, it should be added to the tables. It is for Mobile & Desktop (Win.) platforms. Its word processor is called Documents.2600:1700:B6F0:A200:39E9:662C:1CF7:EB47 (talk) 02:34, 3 February 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  MobiSystems OfficeSuite 

message: Issue: Some word processors in the article are discontinued (no longer in active development) without any indication of this. It could be misleading or a nuisance depending on what you are looking at the article for.12think (talk) 00:39, 7 April 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Discontinued or no longer in active development 

message: Issue: There are newer operating systems to add here, and also we could take this opportunity to remove some lesser used.12think (talk) 00:17, 7 September 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Operating system compatibility 

message: The criteria I came here to learn about - what are the regular expression search and replace capabilities of the various word processors - isn't included at all. That appears to be because there's an entire table missing - the one that details one's actual ability to edit files - search and replace, tables, columns, headers & footers, non-keyboard characters, that sort of thing.
Is that an actual decision to not include any of that, or simply a "nobody did it" default?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 97.113.170.201 (talk) 23:46, 17 November 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: I believe it is a case of simply "nobody did it". Keeping what is already here up-to-date is probably a priority. 12think (talk) 09:18, 2 January 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  What goes on this page and what doesn't? Who decides and how? 

message: LibreOffice Writer has had export to .png picture files at your choice of several resolutions.  (600 dpi seems to make very good printouts.)  The version I use is 5.4.7.2, which seems to be the last version that works on XP3.  
Version 7.2 still has it, according to the .pdf manual.
Some of the things that can be done are modify font characters that you can't find a suitable version of in any available font, change word spacing to fit the line or page, make upsidedown text, etc.
After processing the .png picture files, I put them in a new "text" document and export to .pdf at lossless resolution, so it will always print correctly.
I do not know if any other word processor has this feature, so I hesitate to put a new column in the export features section.  This feature does need to be shown somewhere, as it puts LibreOffice way ahead of ones that don't have it.
agb  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.233.167.50 (talk) 20:38, 24 February 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  LibreOffice Writer Export as .png