Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!pt.cs.cmu.edu!sei!bwb From: bwb@sei.cmu.edu (Bruce Benson) Newsgroups: comp.windows.ms Subject: Re: Which Word Processor is easiest to use? Message-ID: <7367@fy.sei.cmu.edu> Date: 30 May 90 15:13:13 GMT References: <7343@fy.sei.cmu.edu> Reply-To: bwb@sei.cmu.edu (Bruce Benson) Organization: Software Engineering Institute, Pittsburgh, PA Lines: 45 In article gustwick@wf-aus.cactus.org (Bob Gustwick ) writes: >don't be too certain. when i called to complain about WFW <--> Word 5.0 >compatibility i mentioned that word for mac seemed more compatible w/ >word 5.0 than WFW did. responce from several different people >in the WFW group was that they didn't have any idea what the >word for mac people were doing. "We don't talk to those guys, they >are upstairs" was the typical responce. The Words (Mac, PC, WfW) are too similiar for this to be an accurate picture for what is going on at Microsoft, but I don't doubt you may have gotten this kind of answer. >things well between WFW <--> word 5.0)) to make all the Words compatible. >i expected to be able to take my documents from WFW, Word for Mac, >and Word 5.0 w/o a hitch... balderdash. they are all different. >Word 5.0 and Word for Mac seem to be the closest cousins. >that if you take a standard business letter, produced w/ a style >from the microsoft press published book "microsoft word style sheets" >will be similar, but word for windows has a 50/50 chance of just >being screwed up, or being completely unrecognizeable. >i substantiated my claims, i was told that i should be willing >to live w/ the incompatibilities in exchange for the the new >wonderous WFW capabilities... i don't agree. The most recent product will always have the latest and greatest features. That is probably why you bought it. (It may also be the buggiest, esp. if it is an x.0 version.) I'll opt for the newer features over compatibility, because as you mentioned you can always use the old version. Keeping 100% compatibility pretty much guarantees a software engineering nightmare, and a buggy product. >word 5.0 w/o them. i'm just dissappointed that i can't use word 5.0 >to create documents on my laptop, and then use WFW to do the final >preview/graphics inclusion prior to printing on my deskjet. the two Agreed. What MS needs is a small version of WfW for laptops, instead of trying to make word5.0 do the job. I use MS write as my small version, but of course it doens't have style sheets, etc.. Bruce