Path: utzoo!censor!geac!torsqnt!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!wuarchive!julius.cs.uiuc.edu!apple!agate!shelby!neon!pescadero.Stanford.EDU!philip
From: philip@pescadero.Stanford.EDU (Philip Machanick)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.apps
Subject: Fullwrite a write-off?
Message-ID: <1991Jan2.223434.26070@Neon.Stanford.EDU>
Date: 2 Jan 91 22:34:34 GMT
Sender: news@Neon.Stanford.EDU (USENET News System)
Reply-To: philip@pescadero.stanford.edu
Organization: Computer Science Department, Stanford University
Lines: 15

I don't like monopolies, and at the overall architectural level, the
Fullwrite approach appeals to me more than MS Word. 1.0 was a major
disappointment, though. The details weren't thought through properly,
it was buggy, and tended to crash on long documents - not to mention 
major performance problems, even on a ci. 1.1 doesn't seem much better.
Can anyone give a list of "improvements" in 1.5 that would make me change
my mind on trashing Fullwrite? I don't need new features like tables;
I would just like the existing features to work better, and I'm not
prepared to pay $50 for an upgrade if it's useless.

I know about alternatives like Nisus - I'd just like to know if there's
good reason to give Fullwrite another try.
-- 
Philip Machanick
philip@pescadero.stanford.edu