Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!lll-winken!ames!ucsd!sdcc6!sdcc7!ss60s
From: ss60s@sdcc7.ucsd.EDU (Nathaniel L. Beck)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac
Subject: Re: WYSIWYG Math-Text Processing
Message-ID: <1139@sdcc7.ucsd.EDU>
Date: 12 Jan 89 21:35:12 GMT
References: <236@ai.etl.army.mil> <Jan.12.14.11.40.1989.24687@math.rutgers.edu>
Reply-To: ss60s@sdcc7.ucsd.edu.UUCP (Nathaniel L. Beck)
Organization: University of California, San Diego
Lines: 14

I think that math processor choice is a lot like word processor
choice - none are perfect and whatever you are used to is probably
going to beat whatever you aren't used to. I started with MacEqn,
which is okay if far from great. Then I took a look at
Expressionist. It may be better, but it didn't seem enough better
for me to learn something new. So I stick with MacEqn. Not to say
that it might not be better to start with Expressionist, but rather
that it doesn't matter all that much. (BTW MacEqn 2 is a lot easier
to use than version )     

Cheers

Neal Beck
(beck@ucsd.edu)