Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!usc!samsung!sol.ctr.columbia.edu!emory!gatech!uflorida!travis!hrshcx!steved
From: steved@hrshcx.csd.harris.com (Steve Daukas)
Newsgroups: comp.text
Subject: Re: Good WPs for books?
Message-ID: <1048@hrshcx.csd.harris.com>
Date: 29 Mar 91 14:17:13 GMT
References: <1991Mar23.145145.23613@canon.co.uk> <1571@aupair.cs.athabascau.ca>
Organization: Harris Computer Systems - Fort Lauderdale, Fl.
Lines: 68

In article <1571@aupair.cs.athabascau.ca>, louis@cs.athabascau.ca (Louis Schmittroth) writes:
>In article <1991Mar23.145145.23613@canon.co.uk>, rjf@canon.co.uk (Robin Faichney) writes:
>> I'm familiar with using vi+troff under UNIX for reports and so forth,
>> but I'm about to embark on writing a book on a PC, and I know nothing
>> about either PCs or wordprocessing other than vi+troff.
> 
> I suggest you look at getting the MKS version of vi for MS/DOS, and
> getting the EROFF desktop typesetting package from Elan Software.  Call

I am not in my home office, so I can't give exact information - BUT
I believe there are much less expensive alternatives to MKS, especially
if you are interested in more than Vi!

Last I looked, the version of MKS with Vi, awk, et. al. was only a few
hundred dollars less than AT&T's unix for intel (something like $600, but 
I'll have to check).  Those that use MKS usually use alot of DOS as well
as things like Windows et. al..  If you don't know DOS, you probably
can use something else.

There have been discussions in the PC news groups about Vi editors
for DOS, many of them shareware.  Try looking in the comp subgroups related
to PCs and DOS.

If you are looking for a quasi DOS/Unix interface to preserve what you
are use to now, I feel MKS is far too expensive.  There are options ranging
from buying Unix to buying Unix knock-offs like Coherent ($99).

I have Coherent.  It has both Vi and MicroEmacs, as well as roff, awk, et. al..
It also runs rn, cnews, and smail that comes from third party (read free) 
sources - usually those who wanted the utility and wrote it themselves (much 
like how Unix started).  I got Coherent because I wanted to have a similar
technical environment to that of work.  I also use DOS for the wealth of
applications available.

This leads me to another point, namely your book.  My father-in-law is
currently on his second book (pharmacology texts).  He is using TeX because
publishers readily accept it and it is a true typseting language (its also
free).  He looked at roff and concluded that it was too primitive and would be
very difficult to do what he needed.  Besides TeX, there are many other
packages that produce postscript, dvi files, etc...  He simply asked
the publishers what they would prefer...

Another reference to the useability of roff was in the preface of a Unix
text.  The authors comments basically said that it was far too difficult
to get troff to do what they needed and what the publisher wanted.  They
concluded with the following statement:  "we have concluded that there
must be a better way."  This is paraphrased (I'm not in my office at home, so
I can't find the text), but I will provide the actual reference if you desire.

My feelings, based on my father-in-law, and others I have helped set-up
systems, is that you might want to look at other solutions before deciding.
The best thing to do is to talk with those who write on their own systems
(e.g., local independent writers, newspaper contributors, others who did
what you want to do).  I havn't looked, but I'd guess there are a few
news groups chock full of literary types that could help in this area.
Also, you could talk to those in your company that write the manuals and
marcom materials et. al..

I noticed the followup to comp.text, good idea :-)  I don't read that group,
so if you want to reply, you could post to comp.windows.ms as your
original question was posted, or send along some E-mail.

Steve
-- 
.-------------------..---------------------------.
| Stephen C. Daukas ||    sdaukas@csd.harris.com |
| (617) 221-1834    || uunet!travis!misg!sdaukas |
`-------------------'`---------------------------'