Path: utzoo!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!rice!uw-beaver!milton!ogicse!intelhf!agora!parsely!percy!tektronix!sequent!cseaman
From: cseaman@sequent.UUCP (Chris "The Bartman" Seaman)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy
Subject: Re: Zen Ami businessware
Message-ID: <55412@sequent.UUCP>
Date: 15 Mar 91 18:58:10 GMT
References: <40169@cup.portal.com>
Organization: Sequent Computer Systems, Beaverton, OR
Lines: 60

Lee_Robert_Willis@cup.portal.com writes:
< Vector fonts are great if you can afford the time 
< penalty, but I bet there are plenty-o-folks with vanilla 68000 Amigas
< who would be thrilled to have a fast, bitmapped font structured drawing 
< program.

But, again, the final output quality of any bitmapped font is limited,
whereas a vector font is not.

< Earlier, you wrote that you used ProfessionalDraw for the Zorro III bus
< documentation.  Out of curiousity: how could you do such extensive 
< illustration on a program that provides no way of drawing perfectly 
< vertical or horizontal lines, and does not support 'Grid Snap'?  I
< find these to be indespensible.

I beg to differ on these points.  Professional Draw 2.0 does indeed
'draw perfectly vertical and horizontal lines', as well as supporting
grid snap (which IS indispensable).

< >>A business will buy a superfast PC  if
< >>they NEED the power of Ventura Publisher or AutoCAD.  Businesses won't buy
< >>VP if they just need to do simple memos, 
< >
< >Of course not, they'll use WordPerfect or something.  You can too, but you're
< >not writing simple memos, you're interesting in doing things that are pretty
< >much only handled by high end system.
< 
< Dave, you're trying to change the subject on me.  We were talking about
< ProDraw being too powerful, not Ami word processors.  My point is that I
< didn't need all its power (for text manipulation) but I didn't have the
< option to buy a low-end structured drawing program, because 
< there weren't any (that I was aware of.  Since then, everyone keeps 
< telling me about ProVector.)

I think Dave's point was that no one is going to intentionally buy an
overpowered product (when there are alternatives).  It sounds as
though he was agreeing with your statement.

< I am not talking about any capability that cannot be done with a word 
< processor on a PC/AT, which is NOT my definition of a high-end system.
< (I've actually done this work on an PC/XT, but its s_l_o_w.)

Could you elaborate on this?  Which MS-DOS word processor have you used
that supported importing of structured drawings (with vector fonts, if
possible)?  I have never seen such a beast.

< On the more positive side: everyone has given such strong recommendations
< on AmigaTeX that I'm going to give it a try.  It will have to wait til next
< month though, as I've already spent this months software budget.

I think you will be pleasantly surprised.

Regards,
Chris

-- 
Chris (Insert phrase here) Seaman |   o\  /o                See
cseaman@sequent.com <or>          |     ||     "Attack of the Killer Smiley"!
...!uunet!sequent!cseaman         |  \vvvvvv/           Coming Soon
                                  |   \____/      to a newsgroup near you!