Path: utzoo!utgpu!attcan!uunet!lll-winken!ames!mailrus!csd4.milw.wisc.edu!uxc!uxc.cso.uiuc.edu!uxg.cso.uiuc.edu!uxe.cso.uiuc.edu!mcdonald
From: mcdonald@uxe.cso.uiuc.edu
Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc
Subject: Re: 10 Best/Worst for Computing in 1988
Message-ID: <45900187@uxe.cso.uiuc.edu>
Date: 6 Jan 89 17:26:00 GMT
References: <5066@phoenix.Princeton.EDU>
Lines: 22
Nf-ID: #R:phoenix.Princeton.EDU:5066:uxe.cso.uiuc.edu:45900187:000:899
Nf-From: uxe.cso.uiuc.edu!mcdonald    Jan  6 11:26:00 1989



>Not a flame, but a request for more opinions on Word Perfect.
>I have a chance to get Word Perfect 5.0, WP Library, WP Plan,
>etc., the whole package at a tremendous discount, someone please
>tell me I won't be making a mistake :').  Seriously, is it
>unanimously one of the 'worst'?

It (WP 5.0) truly deserves to be on both the best and worst lists. Best because
it does have all the needed features (i.e. it is the first word 
processor to be able to handle, including renumbering, the literature
references in the way they are used by chemistry journals).

And, indeed, the worst. The way it uses function keys is dreadful.
Absolutely NO mneumonic value. I will NEVER be able to use it without
one of those silly templates.

Doug McDonald

P. S. I use TeX, using Emacs as my editor. WordPerfect is essentially
useless for equations - if I didn't need them all the time, WP would be
my choice.