Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!unmvax!charon!cs1552ao
From: cs1552ao@charon.unm.edu (Lazlo Nibble)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.apple
Subject: Re: Good Word Processors
Message-ID: <4580@charon.unm.edu>
Date: 2 Mar 89 22:43:13 GMT
References: <8903011500.aa14186@SMOKE.BRL.MIL> <312@athertn.Atherton.COM>
Reply-To: cs1552ao@charon.unm.edu.UUCP (Lazlo Nibble)
Organization: Studio Nibble -- One Tree Hill, New Mexico
Lines: 24

>I am a faithful Apple II (Plus) user, and I must disagree with this last
>sentence.  There has NEVER, EVER been a usable word processor of any sort
>(in my own opinion) that runs on ANY of the Apple II operating systems
>since the Apple II line came out.  In order to do any serious writing, I 
>have to boot up CP/M.  Short 30-page manuals overflow everything I have
>under DOS 3.3 (I'm in the process of converting to ProDOS, but from what
>I've seen, I have nothing to look forward to in this respect), and they're 
>all so difficult to use.  I have never even HEARD of any word processor 
>that is not memory-based, permitting someone to write long documents.

Seconded!  The best I've been able to say about any II-based WP is that
it was "adequate".  I work with textfiles and "printing to a textfile"
with AppleWorks is a royal pain; WYSIWYG editors are too clumsy and
slow.  ProTERM's built-in editor is nice but only gives me 24k;
AppleWriter gives more space but isn't very powerful . . . the command
structure is sort of clumsy and 44k still isn't enough.

I'd give my right leg for a decent TEXT-processing program that runs
under ProDOS on a 128K enhanced //e and allows files of arbitrary
size.  Does ANYTHING fit the bill?

									 Lazlo
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
cs1552ao@charon.unm.edu     Is chinet the only site named after a paper plate?