Conference hydra::amiga_v1

>    	In searching through this NOTES file and some magazines
>    	I have been unable to find a comparison of Wordprocessor
>    	software packages. 

The most-used word processing packages on the Amiga are Wordperfect,
Excellence, and ProWrite.  (If I missed one, someone else chime it)
You will find more information if you try DIR/TITLE=one_of_these_names.

>       Which is most user friendly, versatile,
>    	compatible to other software, least bug-ridden, etc.?

I've only used Wordperfect for any amount of time.  Without a doubt, it
is the most powerful and has the most features.  Wordperfect sends out
real text whereas ProWrite works in bitmaps (like on a Mac).  I really
don't think bitmapping is for serious word processing.

>    	I am mainly interested in selecting a Wordprocessor that will
>    	retrieve variables from a data file and insert them into
>    	a standard report. Would anyone like to publish comparisons
>    	in this note?

Got me here.  Do you mean to do things like form letters?  Wordperfect does
that somehow, but I've never tried it.  Otherwise I'm not sure what you are
hoping to accomplish.

...richard

    Please forgive a naive question, but what is the difference between word
    processing and desk top publishing?
    
    
    John B.

     Briefly, word processing concentrates on the words, the actual text.
     Word processors traditionally help you create/modify/manipulate
     text.  Desktop publishing concentrates on the presentation of
     that text on paper. Desktop publishing software lets you
     choose fonts, column arrangement, integration of text and graphics
     etc.
     
     Just to confuse things a bit, there are What You See Is What You
     Get (WYSIWYG) "word processors" often referred to as bit-mapped
     word processors, that fall somewhere in between. They offer
     the manipulation of text and some of the column arranging/formatting
     done by desktop publishing software. I think the Mac generally
     gets the credit for starting this approach with MACWrite etc.
     WYSIWYG word processors tend to be slower and/or more clumsy
     to those who just want to get the text done and worry about
     formatting later.
     
     Dave
     

    I use ProWrite for simple word-processing tasks, but for something like
    retrieving variables from a data file and inserting them into a
    standard report I use a package not mentioned in .1: AmigaTeX.
    
    AmigaTeX gets low marks for user friendliness, but I've never found a
    bug in it (it's based on Knuth's TeX, which has been in use world-wide
    since about 1980, and is almost completely bug-free).  It's extremely
    versatile and it processes ASCII files, so it's fairly compatible with
    other software.  I have a report I print using it which takes data
    from my home finances spreadsheet, which can output ASCII.
    
    When you write a report using AmigaTeX you are, in effect, writing a
    typesetting program.  That approach accounts for the versatility and
    the lack of user-friendliness.
    
    You can even create additional fonts for it if you want to.  I have a
    connected script font (based on one used by CORE), which I use for
    signatures on letters.
    
    To make good use of AmigaTeX you should have a 24-pin dot matrix
    printer or (better) a 300 dpi laser printer or the equivalent.  I use
    the NEC SilentWriter 890, a 300 DPI PostScript printer.
        John Sauter

    Side note,  Wordperfect GURUs now when I exit, the only difference
    from before is that I replaced the old agnus with a FAT one.
    
    It also GURUs when doing list processing with accentuated (� la
    ���...) characters in the text.
    
    Jean
    

>    Side note,  Wordperfect GURUs now when I exit, the only difference
>    from before is that I replaced the old agnus with a FAT one.

Bummer.  I haven't got the 1-meg Agnus yet so I didn't know about this one.
Something to look forward too...

...richard

    
    Just a comment about ProWrite...
    
    New Horizons sent me a mailer offering a $25 update from version 2.0 to
    version 2.5.  They included a coupon for a free upgrade to 3.0, which
    will be a major revision.
    
    v2.5 enhancements include faster spell checking, real-time spell
    checking, much faster text entry and scrolling speed (it's near
    impossible to out-type it), and a Workbench 1.4 style window, with the
    horizontal and verticle scroll gadgets all located near the lower right
    corner of the window.
    
    I use ProWrite exclusively, and in conjunction with ProScript, have
    produced reports of professional typeset quality.  (The contents may be
    gibberish, but the sure look great!)
    
    Ed.

    I use Wordperfect and I have found it to be full featured and very
    nice to use.  However it is not for the faint-hearted!  The manual
    is over 500 pages and being feature rich it is difficult to use
    at first.  For example one of the defualt settings is Justification
    On, which means that it will insert extra spaces into lines in order
    to make both margins perfect.
    
    Harry

    Americans or more specificaly United Staters have an easy choice
    when it comes to word processors, others like me (french speaking)
    or Europeans (German, French, Spaniards...) who NEED accentuated
    characters are in a great dilemma, we must have a wp that recognizes
    the keymaps AND prints the corresponding charecters correctly. 
    Now just trying a software package at the store will tell you it
    does it's basic functions, but when more esoteric things are tried
    in the future (like list processing with accents) do you honestly
    think Il'l get my money back, OR that it will be fixed?
    
    Fat chance
    
    Jean
    

    Re: .9
    
    Yeah, you can say that again. :-(
    
    My "favourite" example here is TxED+. I know and own this software
    since it's very beginning and reported it's bugs several times up
    to flame level. What bugs? Oh, numerous, but the "best" one that
    has been in there since the start is that TxED will happily keymap
    and accept all characters, BUT it will break words at non-ASCII
    (7bit) characters and delete the "offending" entity without a blink.
    
    Drives me mad all the time...
    
    <CB>

    I tried WP again last night and I found the reason for the GURUs.
    I was running MACH2.5 (mouse accelerator....) and this was the cause
    of the GURU on exit.  When I disabled MACH, the GURU stopped coming
    for his visit (mind you this is only since adding an obese agnus).
    So I guess this is a problem with MACH not WP.
    
    Jean
    

    Re: .12
    
    Hehe, time for my monthly MACH bashing. ;-)
    Mach is, was and maybe will be forever buggy. Period.
    It's nice looking and all such, but that alone won't do.
    
    Regards,
    
    <CB>

RE: .13

>    Mach is, was and maybe will be forever buggy. Period.
>    It's nice looking and all such, but that alone won't do.

Well, if Mach is bad what is the recommended subsitute?  What DO people use
for a background/window-creator?

George

    
    QMouse is much smaller, slicker, and cuter than Mach.  It has ALL of
    Mach's functionality, and has never caused me a conflict.
    
    Come to think of it, my Amiga never seems to crash anymore these days. 
    Wierd.
    
    Round up the usual suspect nodes to find QMouse.
    
    Ed.
    
    PS:  DMouse, by Matt Dillon, is much like QMouse, minus the clock
    function.
    
    

    Re: .14
    
    Well, I use DMouse 1.20, because of the fancy lineart screen handler
    by Steve Berry and the click_screen_to_back feature , but if this is
    too big for you Qmouse will do nicely.
    Both of these tools can be found on the varios EasyNet Amiga archives.
    
    Regards,
    
    <CB>

    Re: .15
    
    Hehe, this time you'd beat me Ed. ;-)
    
    <CB>

    
    re: .7
    
    Does ProWrite support multiple fonts?  I need to write some stuff
    that includes both English and Russian fonts.  Will Proscript turn
    both fonts in PostScript without a metric for the Russian font?
    
    John

    Yes, ProWrite supports multiple fonts.  It can deal in any font in your
    fonts directory.  ProScript will turn any font into PostScript, but
    for fonts without PostScript metrics, it will simply render the screen
    fonts onto paper.  Combining high-quality PostScript fonts with
    low-quality screen fonts on the same page looks ugly, in my opinion.
        John Sauter

    
    ProScript also has a feature that optionally replaces any bitmapped
    fonts with true PS fonts of your choosing.  If it encounters any alien
    fonts, it just replaces 'em.
    
    This feature is called 'font substitution' and is toggled on or off
    when you perform the conversion to PS.
    
    Ed.

    	I use transcript as a front end to Pro Page.It is the fastest
    wp I have seen.While it is lacking in features ie:no graphics,and
    such it is simple to use,and offers me what I am looking for.I like
    the print previewer a lot.It is rumered tha Pro Page 1.3 will be
    able to use Transcript as a front end from within Pro Page.This
    will be nice.I have not had time to use macros yet so I cannot report
    on these.The manual says you get 10 macros,at 99 keystrokes per
    macro.It also states that macros can be nested.I had problems with
    scribble because I was working on a MSdos manual,and it did not
    handle "/" well. Transcript will help with indexing but not with
    a table of contents.(index of course helps YOU do the Contents)
    								
    								bill

    Since my previous query about Transcript, I went out and bought
    it last weekend. Although I have not played with it long, as .21
    commented, it is a nice fast WP that appears very well designed
    - I certainly had lots of "That's clever", and "Oooo, that's nice"
    type comments as I played with it.
    
    Amiga International reviewed Transcript and praised it highly. They
    also claimed that performance of the package is not affected by
    document size.
    
    Other reasons why I bought Transcript:
    
    it does what I want (at the current time),
    
    it comes from Gold Disk (part of their Home Office Series),
    
    it is integrated with Pro Page - hence, I have an upgrade path,
    
    it will probably be integreated with any other products Gold Disk
    bring out,                              
    
    at 39 pounds sterling, it was very reasonably priced (you can get
    it for 32 pounds sterling via mail order companies),
    
    it is easy and straight forward to use.
    
    Angus

I use Transcript and like it.  It is really deisigned to be a 
front end for Professional Page.  As such, it is lacking in a lot 
of formatting features that you would expect in a word processor.
Doing columns of numbers with tabs is difficult.  Margins are 
global, being set with printer preferences.

These are things that get formatted by Pro.Page but if you need 
these features in a word processor you may be disappointed.  I 
like it for it's ability to enter text and edit it fast.

Randy

    Can anyone tell me if there is a word processor for the Amiga that
    closely resembles Enable from the PC world. My wife is a PC snob,
    and says she won,t use the amiga untill Enable or something close
    is available. Just file compatiblity would probably be enough. At
    least she could transfer stuff from work to home. Though between
    my 9 year old and me playing Earl Weaver, there's really no time
    left for work!
    
    
    Thanks,
     Rick

    This kinda sorta has something to do with WP...
    
    I am looking for a program that allows you to create forms.  Like the
    FMS.  I want to be able to either click, hit carriage return, or enter
    to traverse the various fields I set up in the form.  Anyone know of a
    program that will allow me to create a custom form?  Or is this
    included in any of the WP packages?
    
    mark

    Check out Pen Pal. 
    
    Roger
    

Microfiche Filer can do it, and do it quite well.

Randy