Path: utzoo!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!swrinde!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!samsung!olivea!apple!portal!cup.portal.com!ISW
From: ISW@cup.portal.com (Isaac S Wingfield)
Newsgroups: comp.windows.ms
Subject: Re: MICROGRFIX DrawPlus
Message-ID: <40190@cup.portal.com>
Date: 15 Mar 91 16:28:49 GMT
References: <1991Mar14.171815.20924@bigsur.uucp>
Distribution: na
Organization: The Portal System (TM)
Lines: 35


andrzej@bigsur.UUCP (Andrzej Bieszczad) writes

>I would like to ask the people who used Micrografix DrawPlus
>to mail to me or post in here some technical information on:
>  - the text editing capabilities and font support (symbols ?)
    of the tool,
>  - WYSIWYG,
>  - import/export formats,
>  - use with MS WordForWindows,

>+ general impressions.

---

We're using MG Draw on several '386 machines here. Generally, people who've
never used any object-oriented drawing package think better of it than
people who've used (say) MacDraw. Even on a 33MHz machine, MG is very much
slower than MacDraw - maybe by a factor of 10. Screen redraws are painful.

When printing from within MG, things usually come out WYSIWYG, but when
pasting into WFW, things sometimes get lost; arrowheads, or specific lines,
for example.

We haven't needed to export/import to other DOS/WINDOWS applications, but we do
 need to go to/from MacDraw. We recently bought MG's export package, (an
additional $160), and are just now trying it out; results have been
disappointing. Text gets misaligned or misplaced, and other "artifacts"
mean that you need to minutely inspect the target document for errors.

IMHO, in overall speed, accuracy, and transportability to other apps, 
MG Draw is quite a distance behind similarly functional Mac packages.

Regards, Isaac
isw@cup.portal.com