Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!husc6!hao!oddjob!gargoyle!ihnp4!bentley!cox
From: cox@bentley.UUCP (MH Cox)
Newsgroups: comp.emacs
Subject: Re: Mince (Mince Is Not Complete Emacs)??
Message-ID: <1047@bentley.UUCP>
Date: 11 Feb 88 19:21:25 GMT
References: <456@xios.XIOS.UUCP> <1157@sjuvax.UUCP>
Reply-To: cox@bentley.UUCP (59463-MH Cox)
Distribution: na
Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories, Liberty Corner
Lines: 46

In article <1157@sjuvax.UUCP> tmoody@sjuvax.UUCP (T. Moody) writes:
>In article <456@xios.XIOS.UUCP> jim@xios.UUCP (Jim Tinkess) writes:
>>*****LINE EAT********
>>A company called 'Mark Of the Unicorn' used to make a emacs style
>>editor called MINCE. Are they still in business? Does anyone on the
>>net use mince? I heard it was a very nice editor.
>>								
>>							thanks...
>
>
>Mark of the Unicorn now markets an emacs-style editor plus a
>scribe-style formatter under the name "Final Word."  The editor uses a

(text deleted)

>To a great extent, Final Word is exactly the same product as Perfect
>Writer, the CP/M program that used to be bundled with Kaypros, along
>with WordStar.

Borland's often-announced, soon-to-be-available word-processor, Sprint,
supposedly is a direct descendent of FinalWord (this from a friend of
mine who uses FinalWord and is a beta-tester for Sprint).  Mark of the
Unicorn either changed their name or split up into two companies.  My
last update to FW (version 2.2) was from FinalWord Corporation.

>I read a review of Final Word in which the separation of editing and
>formatting was described as a "breakthrough."  Now, I personally
>appreciate the separation of editing and formatting, especially for
>longer documents, and I eagerly await the appearance of micro-scribe. 
>But this way of doing things is hardly a breakthrough.

I've always had a hard time convincing people that WYSIWYG (what-you-
see-is-what-you-get) is NOT the best way to write a document (especially
a large, complex document).  Most people insist they want to see the
document on the screen the same way as it will be printed out on paper.
Everyone wants to use an Aldus PageMaker or Ventura Publisher to do their
large documents (although Ventura Publisher comes close to being a
WYSIWYG version of FinalWord).  I've been successful in convincing many
of my friends and most of the people I've worked with/for that non-WYSIWYG
document-processing is the way to go.  Unfortunately, I don't think I'll
be able to convert all of Bell Labs to use FinalWord/Scribe versus
troff :-).  Scribe is to troff as Modula 2 is to assembler...

-- 
Michael H. Cox
(201) 580-8622