Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site utah-cs.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!allegra!oliveb!hplabs!utah-cs!halff
From: halff@utah-cs.UUCP (Henry M. Halff)
Newsgroups: net.micro,net.micro.pc
Subject: Re: Word perfect 4.0:  Information wanted
Message-ID: <3485@utah-cs.UUCP>
Date: Wed, 9-Oct-85 07:57:34 EDT
Article-I.D.: utah-cs.3485
Posted: Wed Oct  9 07:57:34 1985
Date-Received: Sat, 12-Oct-85 15:24:11 EDT
References: <1535@emory.UUCP>
Organization: Halff Resources, Inc.
Lines: 46
Xref: watmath net.micro:12299 net.micro.pc:5550


> From kim@emory.UUCP (Kim Wallen {Psychology}) Mon Oct  7 08:38:36 1985
> Newsgroups: net.micro,net.micro.pc
> Subject: Word perfect 4.0:  Information wanted
> Organization: Math & Computer Science, Emory University, Atlanta
> 
> We are interested in getting a word processing package to be used
> over a departmental net.  The two main contenders seems to be
> Microsoft word (runs on all the machines we expect to support
> and seems the most likely to drive the Apple LaserWriter from 
> MS-DOS machines in Postscript) and Word Perfect 4.0 (costs only
> $125 for academics and has the reputation of being fast and easy to
> learn).  Does anyone out there actually have any experience with
> Word Perfect?  Does it seem likely it will ever be ported to nonMS_DOS
> machines?  Has anyone directly compared Word to Word Perfect?  Are
> there real adavantages to either program?  We are particularly
> interested in using the Apple LaswerWriter to its full potential
> and thought that Word was most likely to provide Postscript output
> since they have already done that for the Mac version (I heard that
> the latest version of Word does have Postscript output.  True?).
> Does anyone have any information about the portability of Word Perfect
> or the likelihood that it will eventually generate PostScript files?

I've been using WordPerfect for over a year now and can't say enough good
things about it.  I've also had some experience with Word on an MS-Dos
machine and found WordPerfect far easier to use.  Word was slow, its command
structure was obscure, and there were real problems with formatting and
display.  WordPerfect can be configured to perform with just about any
printer, but don't expect it to produce Postscript files.  WordPerfect
also has no provision for inserting graphics in text.

I could perhaps see getting Word if you can get it to support the more
advanced features of the Laserwriter and if you use it with a mouse.  Other-
wise WordPerfect would be my choice.

Wordperfect is available for Apple //s as ell as MS-Dos machines.  I don't
know about the protability of its files.  SSI does provide conversion
routines that will translate WordPerfect files to and from a number of other
formats.

By the way, WordPerfect is out in new version, 4.1.  Looks to be even better
than 4.0.

-- 
Henry M. Halff                                       Halff Resources, Inc.
halff@utah-cs.ARPA                 4918 33rd Road, N., Arlington, VA 22207