Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!csd4.milw.wisc.edu!bbn!apple!well!svc
From: svc@well.UUCP (Leonard Rosenthol)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac
Subject: Re: Help on FullWrite and Nisus
Summary: Nisus and QUED/M
Message-ID: <10838@well.UUCP>
Date: 26 Feb 89 22:48:30 GMT
References: <8902211446.AA10018@ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU> <710@microsoft.UUCP>
Lines: 29

In article <710@microsoft.UUCP>, stuartb@microsoft.UUCP (Stuart Burden) writes:
> In article <8902211446.AA10018@ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU> ELFJ@VAX5.CIT.CORNELL.EDU
> writes:
> 
> [ why Linda likes Nisus, and why Stuart uses QUED/M ]
> 
>   1. How do the GREP and Macro facilities in Nisus compare to QUED/M?
	Both the GREP and Macro facilities of Nisus are SUPERSETS of the
QUED/M stuff.  The guys at Paragon started with the QUED/M routines and then
proceeded to improve them and add to them.

>   2. Can Nisus read and use QUED/M macros?
	To tell you the truth, I have not tried it but since both Macros file
are stored as TEXT-type files you should be able to bring them in without much
trouble.

>   3. With the additional overhead of features in Nisus, can
>      anyone give me a speed comparison between the two?
> 
	There is, of course, a speed decrease between Nisus and QUED/M but you
are comparing apple and oranges.  A more realistic question is how does Nisus
compare in speed to things like WORD and FWP - and the answer is it outspeeds
them both!!

-- 
+--------------------------------------------------+
Leonard Rosenthol        |  GEnie : MACgician
Lazerware, inc.          |  MacNet: MACgician
UUCP: svc@well.UUCP      |  ALink : D0025