Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!usc!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!wuarchive!emory!mephisto!mcnc!ncsuvx!news
From: rnf@shumv1.ncsu.edu (Rick Fincher)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.apple2
Subject: Re: Appleworks GS advice sought
Message-ID: <1990Sep14.184746.28203@ncsuvx.ncsu.edu>
Date: 14 Sep 90 18:47:46 GMT
References: <4381@crash.cts.com> <11244@claris.com>
Sender: news@ncsuvx.ncsu.edu (USENET News System)
Organization: NCSU Computing Center
Lines: 64

jazzman@claris.com (Sydney R. Polk) writes:

>> 
>> Although the specs on Appleworks GS make it sound pretty neat, the
>> implementation is much less than optimum.  It is slow and still has bugs.
>Have you tried version 1.1?  Believe me, it is much better.  While AW 3.0
>is still faster (esp. sorting), AWGS is faster than MacWrite II on a similar
>Mac (a Mac SE) at everything in the Word Processor, for example.

I'm not associated with Claris and I agree with Syd on AWGS.  I love it.
I have a Mac SE beside my IIGS with Microsoft Word, Excel, and other
programs on it.  I rarely turn the SE on. I prefer AWGS.  I have used
AppleWorks Classic and it is a great program for the IIe, IIc series
machines, but if you have a GS, get GS software to take advantage of the
WYSIWYG features and graphics.  I realize that Classic AppleWorks has
add-ons that allow the use of graphics, but it is cumbersome.  AWGS 1.1
integrates things very nicely.

The only real criticism that I have is that it doesn't print mailing
labels in draft mode from the database.  So I export it to the word
processor and print from there.

I just hate having to remember all those commands in the text oriented
programs. I'm not programmer, not a neophyte, so you can't use that
argument my preference for the graphical interface.

The interface, lets me concentrate on my work, not on working the
program.

>> program overall than in the GS version, which really isn't a version of
>> Appleworks, but an entirely different program that Claris just issued with the
>> Appleworks name.

>I guess I am just one of those lazy Claris programmers (ex-StyleWare) who
>only worked 90+ hour weeks for two years on AWGS.

How would you have implemented a graphical interface version of
AppleWorks?  I had no problem using it.  The programmers who wrote it
learned a lot from the things people did on the Mac and came up with a
super program.

AWGS might be kind of cumbersome to use with a one-floppy system, but if
you put all of those add-ins into AppleWorks Classic it gets REAL
cumbersome on floppies.  There are a lot of restrictions about what
folders stuff goes in.

>As I said, I think that using AWGS 1.1 or AW 3.0 is a matter of personal
>opinion.  They are both powerful, well-rounded, solid products.

Both from Claris too! ;-)

I agree, some folks just work better in a text environment, I prefer the
graphical environment.

So, Syd what are you working 90 hours a week on NOW?! (Can't tell us
huh?, well I'm sure it awesome.

>Syd Polk           | Wherever you go, there you are.
>jazzman@claris.com | Let the music be your light.
>GO 'STROS!         | These opinions are mine.  Any resemblence to other
>GO RICE!           |  opinions, real or fictitious, is purely coincidence.

Rick Fincher
rnf@shumv1.ncsu.edu