Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!lll-winken!cert!netnews.upenn.edu!msuinfo!sticklen
From: sticklen@cps.msu.edu (Jon Sticklen)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.apps
Subject: Re: Fullwrite Prof.
Message-ID: <1990Oct10.135149.25261@msuinfo.cl.msu.edu>
Date: 10 Oct 90 13:51:49 GMT
References: <143100013@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu>
Sender: news@msuinfo.cl.msu.edu
Organization: Michigan State University
Lines: 39

From article <143100013@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu>, by ml27192@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu:
> 
> You write:
> 
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------
> FullWrite
> 
> Hi.  I was wondering if you could give me your impressions of this
> program.  In particular, how does it compare to Word 4.0 and MacWrite II?
> I've used both Word and MW but would like to see what other people think
> about some of the other programs out there.
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> I say all this as a Word power user:
> 

STUFF DELETED

> 
> FullWrite is more like a page-layout-capable version of MacWrite than
> a Word competitor. It has _very_ basic style sheets, so cumbersome
> that there is no point (or flexibility) in using them. Word's outliner
> is also easier to use--or, rather, I haven't figured out how to move things
> around in FW's. And it has no tables. Its manuals are skimpy, even the
> "reference" one, which offers little more that the intro. I love the
> sidebars, but they don't seem to be easily resized!
> 


you have an old version of FullWrite. 1.5 includes
	a) the ability to resize sidebars on the page (very nicely)
	b) tables (1.5 is distributed with a very full table program
	   called TYCYO)


but - i still prefer NISUS largely because of its stablity in relation
to FullWrite. If FullWrite were faster, and less prone to crashes, it
would be very good indeed.

	---jon---