Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!crdgw1!gecrdvm1!syspmzt
From: SYSPMZT@gecrdvm1.crd.ge.com
Newsgroups: comp.sys.atari.st
Subject: Re: ST GEM-based Word Processors
Message-ID: <91123.142433SYSPMZT@GECRDVM1.BITNET>
Date: 3 May 91 18:24:33 GMT
References: <235@evtprp0b.UUCP> <1991Apr24.124220.23028@aplcen.apl.jhu.edu>
Distribution: usa
Organization: General Electric Corporate Research & Development
Lines: 20

In article <1991Apr24.124220.23028@aplcen.apl.jhu.edu>, rsl@aplpy.jhuapl.edu
(Russell S. Laderer) says:
>
>I have been using WordWriter ST by Timeworks for about 2 years,
>and think it is very easy to learn.  It has most of the
>functionality you could want from a basic wp, and it did not
>cost me much (on sale, $49).
>

I used WordWriter several years ago, and like many of the ST word
processors of the time, the character buffering seemed very annoying.
At times I had type ahead, then it would go away, and just didn't
flow very nicely.  Someone had told me that this had to do with the
architecture of the keyboard interface.

Is this still true, or was it ever an accurate description of the
way these things work?  I have a very old 1040, and plan to buy a
new 1040 STe within the next month; will this change things?

Phil Z