dgary@ecsvax.UUCP (06/05/84)
I recently posted somee comments favorable to the IBM Displaywriter. These comments were based on some experience and a lot of very faborably comments by word processing (wp) users who consider it to be the best things since pickles. Also, I know some computer people (like Lawrence Muhlbaier here at Duke - ecsvax!doc to you) whose judgment I respect and who really like the Displaywriter. Well, I received a letter so anti-Displaywriter (from someone else whose judgment I respect) that I thought in fairness (and with the writer's permission) I'd post this differing view: >Date: 2 Jun 84 06:24:32 EDT (Sat) >From: Miriam Clifford <dmimi@ecsvax> >Subject: Re: displaywriter??!!! >To: D. Gary Grady <dgary@ecsvax> >Full-Name: Miriam Clifford >Location: Duke University Medical Center >Address: {decvax,ihnp4,akau}!mcnc!ecsvax!dmimi >Alternate-Path: duke!unc!ecsvax!dmimi >In-Reply-To: Message of 1 Jun 84 21:00:30 EDT (Fri) from dgary@ecsvax > >I see you were working last night too. I'm downloading the source (150K) of >mdm130 to Ed's machine, where I plan to put the modem on his z80 board. The >mtu has an excellent communication package, but it does not do any binary >files--ascii only. It also lacks the bells and whistles of mdm7xx. >Therefore-- > >I'll get PC-WRITE from you, though configuring it for the z100 probably will >be grim. Do you have the source? If so it may be possible. Actually >there are a couple of smallish editers for the z100 that use the function >keys well, etc., that are very nice for program writing. They are the >simple kind without the bells and whistles. If I had to buy an editer >I probably would get FinalWord, though I' >d (sorry about that) like to see one called Palantir. Meanwhile, wordstar >is quite bearable with the function keys set. > >Back to the displaywriter. wp operators have usually used only whatever >they started on, and one gets to like whatever one is used to. I don't >think that that is a reason to recommend a poor machine. (Incidentally, >there are several other problems with the displaywriter that I can't >think of right now--I stay as far from it as I can.) I know two >people, word processors, who used the CPT as their first machine, can >see its several problems, and who HATE the Displaywriter. They are >now using it regularly so it isn't that they haven't learned to use >it yet. > >One thing I find, is that the menus get in the way of what I'm >trying to do--I have to go, probably to seveveral menus, to do the >editing that I need for the next step. Another problem (I think >I'm right about this) is that I can't read one file into another >--I think at all--but at best I can't do it easily. I boiler plate >all the time. > >Another baddy for wp people, is that it won't print several copies >of something at one command--i.e., print 100 copies of x. And the >connection of the printer to more than one machine is awful--instead >of having the machines establish their own queue for what is to print >when according to when it was entered (obviously having the priority >changeable by the operator) as the CPT does, the displaywriter is >under the control of one machine, with it's operator having to >permit the other(s) to enter their material on the queue for printing. >You can imagine how much two wp people (who may not love each other) >like that power struggle. > >There's more--- > >Mimi So, as always, Caveat Emptor. Your turn, Doc! Best, D Gary Grady Duke University Computation Center, Durham, NC 27706 (919) 684-4146 USENET: {decvax,ihnp4,akgua,etc.}!mcnc!ecsvax!dgary