Text handling Nostalgia

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
2 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Text handling Nostalgia

Stephen DeGiulio
Ah, on my first pc, a Commodore 128, I never had a single problem with either the text program or the operating system (the names escape me . . .).

And they did everything I needed to do.

Then I got an 8088 and the dance began . . .

Are the highly sophisticated machines of today really an advancement, or a revenue generating escalation of resource use--resources that could be put to better uses, or just utilized more rationally?

Steve

Stephen DeGiulio, Ph.D.
Prof. Adult Ed/Engl/TESOL
DACC, NMSU
Director, Literacy Volunteers of Doña Ana County
575-527-7641

“Don't limit a child to your own learning, for she was born in another time.”
Rabindranath Tagore (1861-1941)

-----Original Message-----
From: [hidden email] [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of [hidden email]
Sent: Friday, July 7, 2017 10:00 AM
To: [hidden email]
Subject: TidBITS-Talk Digest, Vol 80, Issue 7

Send TidBITS-Talk mailing list submissions to
        [hidden email]

To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
        http://sparky.tidbits.com/mailman/listinfo/tidbits-talk
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
        [hidden email]

You can reach the person managing the list at
        [hidden email]

When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than "Re: Contents of TidBITS-Talk digest..."


Today's Topics:

   1. Re: Favorite Mac Word Processors? (John Ferman)
   2. Re: Favorite Mac Word Processors? ([hidden email])
   3. Re: Favorite Mac Word Processors? (Allen Watson)
   4. Re: Favorite Mac Word Processors? (Allen Watson)
   5. Re: Favorite Mac Word Processors? (Allen Watson)
   6. Specialized word processors (Stephen DeGiulio)
   7. Re: Favorite Mac Word Processors? (Adam Engst)
   8. Re: Favorite Mac Word Processors? (Charles Hawkins)
   9. Re: Favorite Mac Word Processors? (Alexander Forbes)
  10. Re: Favorite Mac Word Processors? (Jeffrey Jones)
  11. Re: Favorite Mac Word Processors? (Charles Hawkins)
  12. Re: Favorite Mac Word Processors? (Joan Boorstein)
  13. DTP, Fonts, and Word. ([hidden email])
  14. Portable WiFi Range Extender (Kenneth Wieschhoff)
  15. Re: Portable WiFi Range Extender (Josh Centers)


----------------------------------------------------------------------

Message: 1
Date: Thu, 6 Jul 2017 11:18:38 -0500
From: John Ferman <[hidden email]>
To: [hidden email]
Subject: Re: Favorite Mac Word Processors?
Message-ID: <[hidden email]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii

Might an approach be to list 'operations needed' and rate all the entries accordingly. In publishing the features differ: think research paper, reference book, novel, news report, etc. Some features might be footnoting, referencing, indexing, headline vs body fonts, and so on.

Sent from my iPad
John Ferman
Minneapolis, MN




------------------------------

Message: 2
Date: Thu, 6 Jul 2017 12:21:34 -0400
From: [hidden email]
To: [hidden email], TidBITS Talk <[hidden email]>
Subject: Re: Favorite Mac Word Processors?
Message-ID: <5836ebbe-8cd2-4dd5-9bc5-489ed8d448cc@Spark>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"

I like that idea!

Bear😎

On Jul 6, 2017, 12:20 PM -0400, John Ferman <[hidden email]>, wrote:

> Might an approach be to list 'operations needed' and rate all the entries accordingly. In publishing the features differ: think research paper, reference book, novel, news report, etc. Some features might be footnoting, referencing, indexing, headline vs body fonts, and so on.
>
> Sent from my iPad
> John Ferman
> Minneapolis, MN
>
>
>
>
> ____________TidBITS Talk Participation Guidelines____________ Post
> only when you have something substantive to contribute.
> Be polite and constructive, and comment on posts, not people.
> Quote sparingly, if at all. We all read the previous message.
> Start threads with a new message to [hidden email].
> Read archives at: http://tidbits.com/pipermail/tidbits-talk/
> Unsubscribe at: http://tidbits.com/mailman/options/tidbits-talk
> ____Mailing List Manners: http://tidbits.com/series/1141 ____
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://sparky.tidbits.com/pipermail/tidbits-talk/attachments/20170706/f5560f91/attachment-0001.html>

------------------------------

Message: 3
Date: Thu, 06 Jul 2017 10:26:58 -0700
From: Allen Watson <[hidden email]>
To: TidBitsTalk TidBitsTalk <[hidden email]>
Subject: Re: Favorite Mac Word Processors?
Message-ID: <[hidden email]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"

Second to Bear!

> On Jul 5, 2017, at 11:02 AM, [hidden email] wrote:
>
> I would remove Word from the list…I think that it is the pits and I use it all thE time!
>
> Bear😎
>
> On Jul 5, 2017, 1:09 PM -0400, Josh Centers <[hidden email]>, wrote:
>> Howdy folks, we’re doing a roundup of macOS word processors, and we wanted to check with the list to see if we’re missing any noteworthy entries. Here’s what we have so far:
>>
>> Adobe InCopy
>> Apache OpenOffice Writer
>> Bean
>> LibreOffice Writer
>> Mellel
>> Microsoft Word
>> NeoOffice
>> Nisus Writer Express
>> Nisus Writer Pro
>> Pages
>> Scrivener
>> TextEdit
>> Write 2
>>
>> Note that we’re not including:
>>
>> a) Apps like Byword, which are text editors with some limited word processing capabilities. They’re lovely apps, but most people wouldn’t use them to write a research paper, resume, or business letter.
>>
>> b) Numerous fly-by-night word processors littering the Mac App Store.
>>
>> c) Web-based solutions like Google Docs, because that’s a whole other kettle of fish.
>>
>> ---
>> Josh Centers
>> Managing Editor - TidBITS
>> http://TidBITS.com
>> http://joshcenters.com
>> @jcenters
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ____________TidBITS Talk Participation Guidelines____________ Post
>> only when you have something substantive to contribute.
>> Be polite and constructive, and comment on posts, not people.
>> Quote sparingly, if at all. We all read the previous message.
>> Start threads with a new message to [hidden email].
>> Read archives at: http://tidbits.com/pipermail/tidbits-talk/
>> Unsubscribe at: http://tidbits.com/mailman/options/tidbits-talk
>> ____Mailing List Manners: http://tidbits.com/series/1141 ____
>
>
> ____________TidBITS Talk Participation Guidelines____________ Post
> only when you have something substantive to contribute.
> Be polite and constructive, and comment on posts, not people.
> Quote sparingly, if at all. We all read the previous message.
> Start threads with a new message to [hidden email].
> Read archives at: http://tidbits.com/pipermail/tidbits-talk/
> Unsubscribe at: http://tidbits.com/mailman/options/tidbits-talk
> ____Mailing List Manners: http://tidbits.com/series/1141 ____

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://sparky.tidbits.com/pipermail/tidbits-talk/attachments/20170706/897c03a5/attachment-0001.html>

------------------------------

Message: 4
Date: Thu, 06 Jul 2017 10:28:56 -0700
From: Allen Watson <[hidden email]>
To: TidBitsTalk TidBitsTalk <[hidden email]>
Subject: Re: Favorite Mac Word Processors?
Message-ID: <[hidden email]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"

When you discuss Nisus Writer Pro, don’t omit mention of its incredible macro language, and the ability to perform full regex search/replace operations. Nisus Writer Pro is my main high-power word processor that I use every day.

> On Jul 5, 2017, at 11:02 AM, [hidden email] wrote:
>
> I would remove Word from the list…I think that it is the pits and I use it all thE time!
>
> Bear😎
>
> On Jul 5, 2017, 1:09 PM -0400, Josh Centers <[hidden email]>, wrote:
>> Howdy folks, we’re doing a roundup of macOS word processors, and we wanted to check with the list to see if we’re missing any noteworthy entries. Here’s what we have so far:
>>
>> Adobe InCopy
>> Apache OpenOffice Writer
>> Bean
>> LibreOffice Writer
>> Mellel
>> Microsoft Word
>> NeoOffice
>> Nisus Writer Express
>> Nisus Writer Pro
>> Pages
>> Scrivener
>> TextEdit
>> Write 2
>>
>> Note that we’re not including:
>>
>> a) Apps like Byword, which are text editors with some limited word processing capabilities. They’re lovely apps, but most people wouldn’t use them to write a research paper, resume, or business letter.
>>
>> b) Numerous fly-by-night word processors littering the Mac App Store.
>>
>> c) Web-based solutions like Google Docs, because that’s a whole other kettle of fish.
>>
>> ---
>> Josh Centers
>> Managing Editor - TidBITS
>> http://TidBITS.com
>> http://joshcenters.com
>> @jcenters
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ____________TidBITS Talk Participation Guidelines____________ Post
>> only when you have something substantive to contribute.
>> Be polite and constructive, and comment on posts, not people.
>> Quote sparingly, if at all. We all read the previous message.
>> Start threads with a new message to [hidden email].
>> Read archives at: http://tidbits.com/pipermail/tidbits-talk/
>> Unsubscribe at: http://tidbits.com/mailman/options/tidbits-talk
>> ____Mailing List Manners: http://tidbits.com/series/1141 ____
>
>
> ____________TidBITS Talk Participation Guidelines____________ Post
> only when you have something substantive to contribute.
> Be polite and constructive, and comment on posts, not people.
> Quote sparingly, if at all. We all read the previous message.
> Start threads with a new message to [hidden email].
> Read archives at: http://tidbits.com/pipermail/tidbits-talk/
> Unsubscribe at: http://tidbits.com/mailman/options/tidbits-talk
> ____Mailing List Manners: http://tidbits.com/series/1141 ____

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://sparky.tidbits.com/pipermail/tidbits-talk/attachments/20170706/ae396717/attachment-0001.html>

------------------------------

Message: 5
Date: Thu, 06 Jul 2017 11:21:31 -0700
From: Allen Watson <[hidden email]>
To: John Turner the Bear😎 <[hidden email]>, TidBitsTalk
        TidBitsTalk <[hidden email]>
Subject: Re: Favorite Mac Word Processors?
Message-ID: <[hidden email]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"

To John Turner: I’m interested in the issue of Nisus Writer Pro’s speed. It’s a major problem for me. I currently need to keep open 3 book-length (over 700 pages) files for reference while I write in another window, and opening those long files, even though saved by Nisus in .rtf format, takes many minutes. I’ve taken to scheduling Nisus to open automatically before I awake, so it has time to opent those files before I sit down to write.

Once open, though, I have no problem with speed. When I do a search or run a Nisus Macro that searches and does calculations based on the result, even in those very long files, it takes only a second or two. Pretty damn amazing speed, as good as BBEdit’s search operations.

So, a question. When you say you installed an SSD, is it your primary or only disk storage, internal, or is it external? I think external SSDs may have other factors that affect speed.

I’ve heard that the new file system in MacOS High Sierra will make a huge difference in file access times, so I am hoping it will improve the file-load times for Nisus Writer Pro.

Allen

> On Jul 5, 2017, at 12:36 PM, [hidden email] wrote:
>
> Don’t count on it! I just doubled my RAM and installed an SSD drive and it made 0 difference in Nisus speed. By the way, it used to be my very favorite WP! Now I am looking for a better alternative. It may be that I am just too picky for my own good.
>
> Bear😎
>
> On Jul 5, 2017, 3:35 PM -0400, Josh Centers <[hidden email]>, wrote:
>> I’m updating the iOS book in Nisus now, and it’s unbearably slow at times. I’m hoping that APFS in High Sierra helps with that.
>>
>> ---
>> Josh Centers
>> Managing Editor - TidBITS
>> http://TidBITS.com
>> http://joshcenters.com
>> @jcenters
>>
>>> On Jul 5, 2017, at 2:12 PM, [hidden email] wrote:
>>>
>>> On the other hand from what I can see it does what is was designed for really well. I could not believe that it opened a 300 page doc in less than 15 seconds. If only Word, Nisus or Pages were that fast.
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ____________TidBITS Talk Participation Guidelines____________ Post
>> only when you have something substantive to contribute.
>> Be polite and constructive, and comment on posts, not people.
>> Quote sparingly, if at all. We all read the previous message.
>> Start threads with a new message to [hidden email].
>> Read archives at: http://tidbits.com/pipermail/tidbits-talk/
>> Unsubscribe at: http://tidbits.com/mailman/options/tidbits-talk
>> ____Mailing List Manners: http://tidbits.com/series/1141 ____
>
>
> ____________TidBITS Talk Participation Guidelines____________ Post
> only when you have something substantive to contribute.
> Be polite and constructive, and comment on posts, not people.
> Quote sparingly, if at all. We all read the previous message.
> Start threads with a new message to [hidden email].
> Read archives at: http://tidbits.com/pipermail/tidbits-talk/
> Unsubscribe at: http://tidbits.com/mailman/options/tidbits-talk
> ____Mailing List Manners: http://tidbits.com/series/1141 ____

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://sparky.tidbits.com/pipermail/tidbits-talk/attachments/20170706/a2b6e2e2/attachment-0001.html>

------------------------------

Message: 6
Date: Thu, 6 Jul 2017 16:43:36 +0000
From: Stephen DeGiulio <[hidden email]>
To: "[hidden email]" <[hidden email]>
Subject: Specialized word processors
Message-ID:
        <[hidden email]>
       
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"

Just a quick suggestion for a complicated and expensive, but very useful, Nota Bene. It's not a native MAC app, but comes in a bottled wine version. If I understand it correctly, it is a descendant of XYWrite.

Aimed at scholars, it does more than one series of foot/endnotes; extensive reference lists with notes; two levels of code viewing and editing; outlining; phrase libraries; flexible clipboard; text marking and annotations; academic styles can be switched at will, including notes; an add-on textbase makes tons of files, including PDF, WORD, etc. searchable, and so on, and on. Such a complicated program has glitches, but a prompt and helpful support system.

Its hidden gem is several editing moves that, AFAIK, don't exist in other programs, but that make serious editing easier, faster, and more pleasant, in my experience. Moves like not automatically replacing selected text--so you can see two versions, and reversing letters, words, clauses, and paragraphs. These are options that can be set to standard WORD behavior, but then, why?

Happy typing

Steve

Stephen DeGiulio, Ph.D.
Prof. Adult Ed/Engl/TESOL
DACC, NMSU
Director, Literacy Volunteers of Doña Ana County
575-527-7641

“Don't limit a child to your own learning, for she was born in another time.”
Rabindranath Tagore (1861-1941)

*********************************



------------------------------

Message: 7
Date: Thu, 6 Jul 2017 16:21:18 -0400
From: Adam Engst <[hidden email]>
To: TidBITS Talk <[hidden email]>
Subject: Re: Favorite Mac Word Processors?
Message-ID:
        <CAJpOjni0Ho+NN318ZroXFF2odg8CV=[hidden email]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"

On Thu, Jul 6, 2017 at 12:18 PM, John Ferman <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Might an approach be to list 'operations needed' and rate all the
> entries accordingly. In publishing the features differ: think research
> paper, reference book, novel, news report, etc. Some features might be
> footnoting, referencing, indexing, headline vs body fonts, and so on.
>

We’re just doing a survey on what people like and don’t like in Mac word processors, not attempting to provide a comprehensive feature breakdown of every imaginable app that could be used for writing. :-)

Seriously, although someone could attempt such a research project, it would require far more input than nearly anyone would be willing to provide.

cheers... -Adam
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://sparky.tidbits.com/pipermail/tidbits-talk/attachments/20170706/1fe0bb3a/attachment-0001.html>

------------------------------

Message: 8
Date: Thu, 6 Jul 2017 21:19:06 +0000
From: Charles Hawkins <[hidden email]>
To: TidBITS Talk <[hidden email]>
Subject: Re: Favorite Mac Word Processors?
Message-ID: <[hidden email]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"

Well, I use Word pretty much exclusively.  I switched to Word from MacWrite way back when and have stuck with it ever since.

I have not been happy with some of the “Windowsy” changes over the years, but neither have I gotten fed up to the point of switching.

It does what I need, so … And of course, it was the standard at my university when I still worked there, which was an added incentive.

Chuck

On Jul 6, 2017, at 4:21 PM, Adam Engst <[hidden email]<mailto:[hidden email]>> wrote:


On Thu, Jul 6, 2017 at 12:18 PM, John Ferman <[hidden email]<mailto:[hidden email]>> wrote:
Might an approach be to list 'operations needed' and rate all the entries accordingly. In publishing the features differ: think research paper, reference book, novel, news report, etc. Some features might be footnoting, referencing, indexing, headline vs body fonts, and so on.

We’re just doing a survey on what people like and don’t like in Mac word processors, not attempting to provide a comprehensive feature breakdown of every imaginable app that could be used for writing. :-)

Seriously, although someone could attempt such a research project, it would require far more input than nearly anyone would be willing to provide.

cheers... -Adam


____________TidBITS Talk Participation Guidelines____________ Post only when you have something substantive to contribute.
Be polite and constructive, and comment on posts, not people.
Quote sparingly, if at all. We all read the previous message.
Start threads with a new message to [hidden email]<mailto:[hidden email]>.
Read archives at: http://tidbits.com/pipermail/tidbits-talk/
Unsubscribe at: http://tidbits.com/mailman/options/tidbits-talk
____Mailing List Manners: http://tidbits.com/series/1141 ____

Charles E. Hawkins                                  Ask Questions
Professor Emeritus of Physics                Seek Answers
Department of Physics and Geology       Question the Answers
Northern Kentucky University Question the Questions Highland Heights, Kentucky
Phone:    859-572-0925
FAX:        859-572-6092

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://sparky.tidbits.com/pipermail/tidbits-talk/attachments/20170706/a42392c1/attachment-0001.html>

------------------------------

Message: 9
Date: Thu, 06 Jul 2017 14:52:56 -0700
From: Alexander Forbes <[hidden email]>
To: TidBITS Talk <[hidden email]>
Subject: Re: Favorite Mac Word Processors?
Message-ID: <[hidden email]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"


> On Jul 6, 2017, at 2:19 PM, Charles Hawkins <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> Well, I use Word pretty much exclusively.  I switched to Word from MacWrite way back when and have stuck with it ever since.
>
> I have not been happy with some of the “Windowsy” changes over the years, but neither have I gotten fed up to the point of switching.
>
> It does what I need, so … And of course, it was the standard at my university when I still worked there, which was an added incentive.
>
> Chuck

All good points! Ever since the PC and Mac came to the workplace in the early nineties, we used Word for all non-email documents. I was an early adopter at home (Mac) and still use it for writing (Mac) when I want styled text and improved spelling and Grammar checking. However Microsoft Word for Mac (2011) is well dumbed-down from a comparable version I have on an old PC, notably find/replace and the annoying "windowsy" features you refer to.

Most of the apps we're talking about and many others focus on "look and feel" appearance changes, and I don't particularly care for gratuitous appearance changes in applications I've been using in some cases for decades. I'd prefer to see more real, meaningful changes - processing features or improvements - under the hood.

As I mentioned the other day, I create a l0t of book text in iBooks Author, but I keep a parallel Word version for its better spell and grammar checking - despite many idiotic suggestions from the grammar and syntax part.

When my eyesight was better, spelling and grammar were rarely a problem. Nowadays, when I edit, I introduce almost as many new errors as I'm correcting. So for me at least, this is also an "Accessibility" issue.

I would think spelling and grammar checking features would certainly pertain to this thread on Mac word processors - funny, not sure when I've heard the phrase "word processor" outside this thread since the nineties. I would be especially interested in hearing from readers who may have found smarter and more powerful checking tools in some of the other apps on this TIDBits' list.

Alex

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://sparky.tidbits.com/pipermail/tidbits-talk/attachments/20170706/b57c5bd0/attachment-0001.html>

------------------------------

Message: 10
Date: Thu, 06 Jul 2017 18:28:28 -0400
From: Jeffrey Jones <[hidden email]>
To: TidBITS Talk <[hidden email]>
Subject: Re: Favorite Mac Word Processors?
Message-ID: <[hidden email]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"

On Jul 6, 2017, at 5:52 PM, Alexander Forbes <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
>  I would be especially interested in hearing from readers who may have found smarter and more powerful checking tools in some of the other apps on this TIDBits' list.


A tool I have long found to be excellent for finding certain types of errors -- such as repeated words, missing words, wrong words, awkward phrasing -- is macOS's but-in text-to-speech feature. Any app that uses Apple's text editing API has text-to-speech. Usually, the keyboard shortcut Option-Esc speaks the current selection. The menu command is Edit > Speech > Start Speaking. That is also in the contextual menu.

Text-to-speech is in virtually all Apple apps -- TextEdit, Pages, of course, and Mail, Safari, and also many non-Apple apps.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://sparky.tidbits.com/pipermail/tidbits-talk/attachments/20170706/3b807c1e/attachment-0001.html>

------------------------------

Message: 11
Date: Fri, 7 Jul 2017 01:22:31 +0000
From: Charles Hawkins <[hidden email]>
To: TidBITS Talk <[hidden email]>
Subject: Re: Favorite Mac Word Processors?
Message-ID: <[hidden email]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"

Well, I don’t have sophisticated docs to deal with since retirement!  So some of the issues raised in this thread are non-issues for me.

It is amusing in this context to think back on the major conflict over Word vs Word Perfect among the “PC” users at NKU.  Mac people were all into Word, but the “PC” people were all into WP.  WP was horrible, but the dedicated MSDOS users didn’t want to give it up.  Hard to imagine nowadays …

Chuck

On Jul 6, 2017, at 5:52 PM, Alexander Forbes <[hidden email]<mailto:[hidden email]>> wrote:


On Jul 6, 2017, at 2:19 PM, Charles Hawkins <[hidden email]<mailto:[hidden email]>> wrote:

Well, I use Word pretty much exclusively.  I switched to Word from MacWrite way back when and have stuck with it ever since.

I have not been happy with some of the “Windowsy” changes over the years, but neither have I gotten fed up to the point of switching.

It does what I need, so … And of course, it was the standard at my university when I still worked there, which was an added incentive.

Chuck

All good points! Ever since the PC and Mac came to the workplace in the early nineties, we used Word for all non-email documents. I was an early adopter at home (Mac) and still use it for writing (Mac) when I want styled text and improved spelling and Grammar checking. However Microsoft Word for Mac (2011) is well dumbed-down from a comparable version I have on an old PC, notably find/replace and the annoying "windowsy" features you refer to.

Most of the apps we're talking about and many others focus on "look and feel" appearance changes, and I don't particularly care for gratuitous appearance changes in applications I've been using in some cases for decades. I'd prefer to see more real, meaningful changes - processing features or improvements - under the hood.

As I mentioned the other day, I create a l0t of book text in iBooks Author, but I keep a parallel Word version for its better spell and grammar checking - despite many idiotic suggestions from the grammar and syntax part.

When my eyesight was better, spelling and grammar were rarely a problem. Nowadays, when I edit, I introduce almost as many new errors as I'm correcting. So for me at least, this is also an "Accessibility" issue.

I would think spelling and grammar checking features would certainly pertain to this thread on Mac word processors - funny, not sure when I've heard the phrase "word processor" outside this thread since the nineties. I would be especially interested in hearing from readers who may have found smarter and more powerful checking tools in some of the other apps on this TIDBits' list.

Alex



____________TidBITS Talk Participation Guidelines____________ Post only when you have something substantive to contribute.
Be polite and constructive, and comment on posts, not people.
Quote sparingly, if at all. We all read the previous message.
Start threads with a new message to [hidden email]<mailto:[hidden email]>.
Read archives at: http://tidbits.com/pipermail/tidbits-talk/
Unsubscribe at: http://tidbits.com/mailman/options/tidbits-talk
____Mailing List Manners: http://tidbits.com/series/1141 ____

Charles E. Hawkins                                  Ask Questions
Professor Emeritus of Physics                Seek Answers
Department of Physics and Geology       Question the Answers
Northern Kentucky University Question the Questions Highland Heights, Kentucky
Phone:    859-572-0925
FAX:        859-572-6092

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://sparky.tidbits.com/pipermail/tidbits-talk/attachments/20170707/3207c0e5/attachment-0001.html>

------------------------------

Message: 12
Date: Thu, 6 Jul 2017 21:42:00 -0400 (EDT)
From: Joan Boorstein <[hidden email]>
To: [hidden email]
Cc: [hidden email]
Subject: Re: Favorite Mac Word Processors?
Message-ID: <[hidden email]>

Having read most of the messages in this thread -- with many good comments about many different 'text handling' programs, can someone list the features that a 'word processor' has as opposed to a text editor, desktop-publising software, etc.  That might help to focus the discussion.  

Joan Boorstein

> From [hidden email] Wed Jul  5 13:08:34 2017
> From: Josh Centers <[hidden email]>
> Subject: Favorite Mac Word Processors?
> Date: Wed, 5 Jul 2017 12:06:41 -0500
> To: TidBITS Talk <[hidden email]>
>
> Howdy folks, we're doing a roundup of macOS word processors, and we
> wanted to check with the list to see if we're missing any noteworthy
> entries. Here's what we have so far:
>
> Adobe InCopy
> Apache OpenOffice Writer
> Bean
> LibreOffice Writer
> Mellel
> Microsoft Word
> NeoOffice
> Nisus Writer Express
> Nisus Writer Pro
> Pages
> Scrivener
> TextEdit
> Write 2
>
> Note that we're not including:
>
> a) Apps like Byword, which are text editors with some limited word
> processing capabilities. They're lovely apps, but most people wouldn't
> use them to write a research paper, resume, or business letter.
>
> b) Numerous fly-by-night word processors littering the Mac App Store.
>
> c) Web-based solutions like Google Docs, because that's a whole other
> kettle of fish


------------------------------

Message: 13
Date: Fri, 7 Jul 2017 08:11:44 -0400
From: [hidden email]
To: TidBITS Talk <[hidden email]>
Subject: DTP, Fonts, and Word.
Message-ID: <ba8424a1-85bc-49f5-9613-31635fdd7e2e@Spark>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"

Good Morning Friends!

I sent the below note to the Microsoft Community re: Word in Office 2016. I have huge problems with the Type faces I am using. Lots of suggestions were made to help…none worked. I got an email from James asking if I still needed help? Below is my response which kind of sums up my problems with DTP and Word.


Hi James,
I'm really not sure. I have come to realize that if I were to use Times New Roman or Calibri or Cambria I would have no problems at all. Apparently these fonts have everything needed to produce my work. The problem arises because I need to use two fonts that Word does not like.
I have tried all of the previous suggestions. The only one that seemed to work was to create a style for each font used. When I have to use a Hebrew word I have to select it and then click on the style. Then that word and all like it in the paragraph will be changed. I have a font that contains both the Greek and Hebrew Type faces that I need so that all the fonts I need for the book are two. This solution takes many, many hours to accomplish.
I finished two volumes and imported them into QuarkXpress 2016 and it immediately alerted me that Times New Roman and Calibri were used and they were not on my Mac! Of course not...I had either deleted them or disabled them. As a test I went back to Word and saved the volumes as RTF files and opened them in Nisus, an app that specializes in RTF and I got the same report as I got from Quark.
I worked with Support for almost 90 min yesterday, with them controlling my Mac. They uninstalled Office and then reinstalled it and the problem persists. When I showed the support person that Times New Roman was not on my drive and the Calibri was disabled, she asked me how I had done that? I showed her that I use FontExplorer X Pro as my primary font manager she got upset and told me that it is a 3rd party app and that I can't use it. I told her fine...turned it off...then showed her the same thing in Font Book. She told me that this was not acceptable and broke the link and signed off. Oh well.
I am about to contact the parties who want these books done, there will be 12 vol. in all averaging over 300 pages each...requiring the same type faces and formatting etc. , that I will not be able to use what is desired, and will have to bend, and do something else.
Thanks to all who have tried to help! The one problem with producing books today is that the computer and programmers decide what you can do...but in the days of William Caxton or William Morris the fonts were made by hand and you had total control of what you used and where you used it.

Bear😎
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://sparky.tidbits.com/pipermail/tidbits-talk/attachments/20170707/f92040c4/attachment-0001.html>

------------------------------

Message: 14
Date: Fri, 07 Jul 2017 08:24:10 -0400
From: Kenneth Wieschhoff <[hidden email]>
To: TidBITS Talk <[hidden email]>
Subject: Portable WiFi Range Extender
Message-ID: <[hidden email]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"

I'm off on vacation at Christmas and will be staying at a place where WiFi is available, but it's at a neighbor's house a very short distance away.  I'd love to be able to use it but there's no power where I'd need to place it.  

Is there a device I can buy that is either battery operated or will run from a USB power source to accomplish this?


Kenneth Wieschhoff
[hidden email]



-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://sparky.tidbits.com/pipermail/tidbits-talk/attachments/20170707/4de5aba7/attachment-0001.html>

------------------------------

Message: 15
Date: Fri, 7 Jul 2017 10:56:32 -0500
From: Josh Centers <[hidden email]>
To: TidBITS Talk <[hidden email]>
Subject: Re: Portable WiFi Range Extender
Message-ID: <[hidden email]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii

The product video for this battery-powered TP-Link router indicates that it can be used to extend a Wi-Fi network. http://www.amazon.com/dp/B0088PPFP4/?tag=tidbitselectro00

---
Josh Centers
Managing Editor - TidBITS
http://TidBITS.com
http://joshcenters.com
@jcenters

> On Jul 7, 2017, at 7:24 AM, Kenneth Wieschhoff <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> I'm off on vacation at Christmas and will be staying at a place where WiFi is available, but it's at a neighbor's house a very short distance away.  I'd love to be able to use it but there's no power where I'd need to place it.  
>
> Is there a device I can buy that is either battery operated or will run from a USB power source to accomplish this?
>
>
> Kenneth Wieschhoff
> [hidden email]
>
>
>
>
>
> ____________TidBITS Talk Participation Guidelines____________ Post
> only when you have something substantive to contribute.
> Be polite and constructive, and comment on posts, not people.
> Quote sparingly, if at all. We all read the previous message.
> Start threads with a new message to [hidden email].
> Read archives at: http://tidbits.com/pipermail/tidbits-talk/
> Unsubscribe at: http://tidbits.com/mailman/options/tidbits-talk
> ____Mailing List Manners: http://tidbits.com/series/1141 ____




------------------------------

____________TidBITS Talk Participation Guidelines____________ Post only when you have something substantive to contribute.
Be polite and constructive, and comment on posts, not people.
Quote sparingly, if at all. We all read the previous message.
Start threads with a new message to [hidden email].
Read archives at: http://tidbits.com/pipermail/tidbits-talk/
Unsubscribe at: tidbits.com/mailman/options/tidbits-talk
____Mailing List Manners: http://tidbits.com/series/1141 ____

End of TidBITS-Talk Digest, Vol 80, Issue 7
*******************************************



____________TidBITS Talk Participation Guidelines____________
Post only when you have something substantive to contribute.
Be polite and constructive, and comment on posts, not people.
Quote sparingly, if at all. We all read the previous message.
Start threads with a new message to [hidden email].
Read archives at: http://tidbits.com/pipermail/tidbits-talk/
Unsubscribe at: http://tidbits.com/mailman/options/tidbits-talk
____Mailing List Manners: http://tidbits.com/series/1141 ____
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Text handling Nostalgia

adamengst
Administrator

On Fri, Jul 7, 2017 at 2:24 PM, Stephen DeGiulio <[hidden email]> wrote:
Are the highly sophisticated machines of today really an advancement, or a revenue generating escalation of resource use--resources that could be put to better uses, or just utilized more rationally?

I think about this sometimes too, but when I look at all the stuff we can do now that was impossible in the past, I feel better. For my first books, every chapter had to be a different file because the word processors of the day couldn’t handle an entire book in one file — even InDesign couldn’t do that, and it was a big deal that it could apply styles across multiple files.

cheers... -Adam



____________TidBITS Talk Participation Guidelines____________
Post only when you have something substantive to contribute.
Be polite and constructive, and comment on posts, not people.
Quote sparingly, if at all. We all read the previous message.
Start threads with a new message to [hidden email].
Read archives at: http://tidbits.com/pipermail/tidbits-talk/
Unsubscribe at: http://tidbits.com/mailman/options/tidbits-talk
____Mailing List Manners: http://tidbits.com/series/1141 ____
Loading...