Path: utzoo!attcan!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!csd4.milw.wisc.edu!cs.utexas.edu!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!rutgers!dptg!att!shuxd!attdso!rolls!mtuxo!lzfme!jwi
From: jwi@lzfme.att.com (Jim Winer @ AT&T, Middletown, NJ)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc
Subject: Re: Desktop Publishers???
Summary: WordPerfect 5.0 vs Ventura
Message-ID: <1504@lzfme.att.com>
Date: 21 Jul 89 14:01:14 GMT
References: <8703@attctc.Dallas.TX.US> <1640008@hpspcoi.HP.COM>
Organization: AT&T, Lincroft NJ
Lines: 57

Danny Low writes:
> 
> I use Wordperfect 5.0 to product documents that incorporate
> both text and graphics. It is much much easier and faster
> than using a DTP package. It is a clearly superior method
> if the manual is subject to frequent changes. In this
> situation, a DTP package is justified only if the manual
> MUST be of the highest possible publication standards.
> If the manual "only" needs to look professionally done then
> WP 5.0 will do a perfectly good job.

I use both WordPerfect 5.0 and Ventura 2.0.  I disagree with the
above statement. Both are excellent programs, but they have slightly
different uses.

WordPerfect is better than Ventura for technical writing where you
are dealing primarily with text plus graphics -- that is where the
text is primary. I use WordPerfect for product manuals that are
primarily text. What WP does that is useful is to move the graphics
to follow the text and maintains the graphics position relative to
the text. (VP maintains the graphics position relative to the page.)
What WP is not good at is page layout. If you add text, the format
of pages changes. WP is also very poor for newsletter and magazine
layout because it cannot deal with multiple text streams that are
interleaved (i.e., "continued on page x").

Ventura is better than WordPerfect for situations where you are
dealing primarily with graphics plus text (note the reversal of
emphasis). I use Ventura for Picture-By-Picture how-to books and for
newsltters and magazines. In all of these cases, the page layout is
primary and the text must fit into it. In VP, the page is fixed and
the text moves while in WP the text is fixed and the page
moves. If you "anchor" a graphic to text in VP, it will move to the
page containing the text, but its position on the page will be
relative to the page (e.g., upper left corner) rather than relative
to the text (e.g., immediately following theparagraph in which it is
referenced).

Compared to this basic difference in philosophy, most of the other
differences between WP and VP are minor. They are both extremely
powerful. Incidently, Ventura is just as easy and fast as
WordPerfect, just different.

Pagemaker is another story. It is ideal for short brochures and
advertising, but falls down rather badly when you are dealing with
long documents. It is exactly what it's names says: page maker. (Now
if we had a book maker program....)

Jim Winer ..!lzfme!jwi (Usually unable to reply to email outside AT&T)

Those persons who advocate censorship offend my religion.

Upuaut:	a wolf-headed Egyptian deity | Voodoo: the art of sticking ideas
	assigned as Guidance System  |         into people and watching
	for the Barque of Ra.        |         them bleed.

The opinions expressed here are not necessarily