Path: utzoo!mnetor!tmsoft!torsqnt!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!usc!cs.utexas.edu!uunet!mcsun!ukc!strath-cs!str-va!cids05
From: cids05@vaxa.strath.ac.uk (@Dr Stephen K Tagg@)
Newsgroups: comp.windows.ms
Subject: Re: Windows Apps questions!!!
Message-ID: <1991Mar25.152357.11168@vaxa.strath.ac.uk>
Date: 25 Mar 91 15:23:57 GMT
References: <117X02JR06U101@JUTS.ccc.amdahl.com> <1991Mar20.074604.14958@wam.umd.edu> <1991Mar21.002659.27783@zeus.mgmt.purdue.edu> <1991Mar21.030053.21920@cs.uoregon.edu>
Organization: Strathclyde University VAX Cluster
Lines: 14

In article <1991Mar21.030053.21920@cs.uoregon.edu>, akm@cs.uoregon.edu (Anant Kartik Mithal) writes:
>>A: WinWord 1.1 is mainly an upgrade to the display graphics, buttons look 
>>   more 3-D, window borders are prettier, etc.  Both are fully compatiable 
>>   with Windows 3.0 and there is no major functionally difference.
> 
> The functional differences are for the most part in the number of file
> formats that 1.1 can import over 1.0. 1.1 is *supposed* to be able to
> read and write Word for the Mac 4.00c files, but I haven't got this to
> work. (Partly because RTF works, and so I couldn't be bothered.)
I have successfully converted lots of files directly into Word for Mac format
with the new vesion. In fact I have a macro that converts the exc...nt of
DisplayWrite-4 (RFT files) into Word for Mac format. Half of our department
has ditched the horrible IBM system 36 and gone MAC. The other half are going
to go Word for Windows soonest.