Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!dino!ux1.cso.uiuc.edu!tank!msuinfo!cpsin2!dailey
From: dailey@cpsin2.uucp (Chris Dailey)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga
Subject: Word Processor Stuff
Message-ID: <1990Jun7.135337.19043@msuinfo.cl.msu.edu>
Date: 7 Jun 90 13:53:37 GMT
References: <20724@snow-white.udel.EDU> <46200075@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu>
Sender: news@msuinfo.cl.msu.edu
Organization: Michigan State University, East Lansing
Lines: 46

I figured it was about time to change the Subject: heading.  But anyway:

In article <46200075@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu> jhc00614@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu writes:
>     To Chris Dailey, who asked why Amiga's are bundled w/ a decent word
>processor like MacWrite is on the Mac...
>     Apple used to bundle MacWrite for the Mac but it really stifled WP 
>development for the system.  Who'd want to shell out bucks for another WP
>when MacWrite was decent enough? [...]   I know Mac developers
>were very happy about that.
>     For the same reasons, I figure, CBM will not bundle much more than
>notepad and Amiga Basic.  We'd probably never have gotten WordPerfect, ProWrite,

If you look at MicroSoft Word or WordPerfect on the Mac, they are both
far better than the early versions of MacWrite.  I think MacWrite was
originally intended to fill a very small need.  If someone needed more
than that, they could look for more.  I think when they started making
MacWrite bigger (5.0 has spellcheck, etc.) was when things became
difficult.  A simple word processor right now would, in my opinion, make
the others strive for a better product.  I think that professional
products (those with professional prices, eg ProWrite @ $175) must have
extra features that people are willing to pay $175 for.  I wouldn't pay
that much for a bunch of features I don't need!  But I can see where
someone that needed those features would, and rightly should!

Maybe Commodore could have a simple word processor of their own that
they could sell separately for maybe $20 that does fonts and maybe
imports graphics in a manner similar to the early versions of MacWrite.
Maybe add tabs, headers, footers, l/r margins.  There you have your
product, nice and simple, user friendly.  Right now I see nothing like
that out for the Amiga.  I am surprised since this is an area that is
usually filled by PD/Shareware.

>     Also, look at the flak CBM is taking for bundling AmigaVision w/ their
>computers now.....

I haven't really seen it, but then again I'm not on top of the
Multi-Media world.  As far as I can tell, if there wasn't really a
product out there that was good enough to compete with Amiga-Vision,
then why are people complaining?  If there was, then please forgive my
ignorance.  This seems to me like a good step for Commodore to take.

--
  /~\  Chris Dailey   (CPS Undergrad, SOC Lab Coord, AMIG user group Secretary)
 C oo  dailey@cpsin1.cps.msu.edu  (subliminal message-make WP5.1 for the Amiga)
 _( ^)   "I am thankful for one leg.  To limp is no disgrace --
/   ~\    I may not be number one, but I can still run the race." -from B.C.