|
 |
On Mon, 10 Mar 2008 04:23:08 -0500, Warp wrote:
> Jim Henderson <nos### [at] nospam com> wrote:
>> 20 years ago, I could run WordPerfect for DOS on a DOS machine that was
>> an 8086 or 80286 and got decent performance - instant responses and
>> whatnot.
>
> Was WordPerfect for 8086 wysiwyg? I doubt so.
Having used WP51 a fair bit, no, it wasn't WYSIWYG (but for many
programs, it's not WYSIWYG, but WYSIWYHYG) - but most users of WP could
predict with a staggering amount of accuracy what the page would look
like when it was printed. The earliest WYSIWYG word processors often did
unexpected things due to font selection or other factors, resulting in a
lot of frustration on the part of users of those early programs.
> The programs are doing different things. If you want to compare
> software
> on equal terms, compare it to LaTeX.
Um, no, I didn't have to learn what is essentially a semantic language in
order to use WP. That's a ridiculous comparison.
Jim
Post a reply to this message
|
|
