terrell@druhi.ATT.COM (Eric Terrell) (03/29/89)
I'm going to retract some of my flame about MS WRITE. After some encouragement from Ken Badertscher at Atari, I decided to play around with MS Write some more. MOST of the complaints that I had about Write were due to an improper installation on my machine, not to bugs in the Write program. I'll SHARE the blame for this with the confusing installation process. My first installation problem was that I was using the ATARI LASER PRINTER driver (and fonts). Since I am using a PANASONIC EPSON compatible, this was a big mistake! After I set things up so that I was using the EPSON FX driver and the EPSON fonts, I was pleasantly suprised to see BEAUTIFUL output on my 9-pin printer. The Write folks are to be applauded for their use of the "2-pass Letter Quality Mode" of EPSON printers: every line is printed twice, with the second pass deliberately shifted over a little bit. The result is beautiful characters on the page, with great contrast and fantastic clarity. Another problem that I had was that "page layout" sort of information couldn't be saved for some reason. It was tedious to have to enter the size of the page, and the margins every time that I ran the program. This problem has GONE AWAY since I started using the right printer driver and the right fonts. The most irritating problem that I had was that I couldn't print output on my monochrome monitor. I CAN now, but don't ask me what I did! IN SUMMARY, I would like to replace my flame with the following: MS Write for the Atari ST does have bugs, as does ANY initial version of a program. None of these bugs are "show-stoppers". The output of the program using GDOS fonts (at least on my EPSON compatible) is OUTSTANDING. Although the setup process is confusing, and can result in setups that "almost work", with some fiddling around things can be set up properly. I would be happy to help out anyone who is having similar problems with MS Write on the Atari. Eric Terrell (att!druhi!terrell)
ignac@electro.UUCP (Ignac Kolenko) (03/30/89)
In article <4085@druhi.ATT.COM> terrell@druhi.UUCP (TerrellE) writes: > >I'm going to retract some of my flame about MS WRITE. no, no, don't do it, don't do it!!!!!!! :-) :-) > >IN SUMMARY, I would like to replace my flame with the following: >MS Write for the Atari ST does have bugs, as does ANY initial version of ^^^^^^^^^^^ >a program. unfortunately, it doesn't look like there are gonna be any more versions from microsoft. so the initial version is the final version. i don't understand why atari just didn't hire any programmers to fix the damn bugs in write. the program itself has promise, but the stupid little bugs are just too annoying to work with. > None of these bugs are "show-stoppers". The output of the >program using GDOS fonts (at least on my EPSON compatible) is OUTSTANDING. >Although the setup process is confusing, and can result in setups that >"almost work", with some fiddling around things can be set up properly. > as should any program using gdos, its fonts, and the supplied printer drivers. i don't think that microsoft is responsible for any of that!! as it stands, ms write is usable for small jobs. for any large word processing jobs, you just can't trust it. -- Ignac A. Kolenko (The Ig) watmath!watcgl!electro!ignac "Those who can't, criticize" (author unknown) "ain't it ironic that according to Rushton, Suzuki is right!"
kbad@atari.UUCP (Ken Badertscher) (04/01/89)
In article <446@electro.UUCP> ignac@electro.UUCP (Ignac Kolenko) writes: |unfortunately, it doesn't look like there are gonna be any more versions |from microsoft. so the initial version is the final version. That's interesting, Ignac. Where do you get your information? Last I heard, we are trying to entice Microsoft into updating Write. |i don't understand why atari just didn't hire any programmers to fix the |damn bugs in write. Because the damn program belongs to Microsoft, and we don't have the damn source code. It's damn difficult to hire damn programmers to fix the damn bugs when you have no damn source. |as it stands, ms write is usable for small jobs. for any large word processing |jobs, you just can't trust it. MS Write is used for Atari internal engineering documentation, and is being used to maintain and upgrade the developer documentation. It is a very powerful word processor. As I mentioned in my mail to Mr. Terrell, I hated* write for many, many months before I began to get comfortable with it. Write on the ST has a severe learning curve; mainly because there are so many features! A lot of times, I would have trouble doing things with it, or its features would elude me, and I'd get frustrated by something I thought I couldn't do. Fortunately there are several Write gurus at Atari that have shown me how to work around the problems I've had. Now, when I try to use other WP programs, I miss the features and the flexibility, and I keep coming back to Write... I admit, I must sound like I'm gushing, or "holding the company line," but I'm only defending Write because I think it deserves it. It's highly underrated, because of the difficulty of installing GDOS (the GDOS installation manual leaves a *lot* to be desired) and because of the learning curve. Sure, it isn't bug free, but it's certainly at least as robust as any other WP available for the ST, and it's more powerful than most. -- Ken Badertscher | #include <disclaimer> Atari R&D | No pith, just a path: Software Engine | {portal,ames,imagen}!atari!kbad
caromero@phoenix.Princeton.EDU (C. Antonio Romero) (04/01/89)
In article <446@electro.UUCP> ignac@electro.UUCP (Ignac Kolenko) writes: >In article <4085@druhi.ATT.COM> terrell@druhi.UUCP (TerrellE) writes: >i don't understand why atari just didn't hire any programmers to fix the >damn bugs in write. the program itself has promise, but the stupid little >bugs are just too annoying to work with. Consider that it's a Microsoft program. Somehow I doubt that Atari even had the source to Write, or the rights to do anything with it if they did have source. (Then again, I could be wrong.) Wasn't "lack of source" a problem on some of Atari's other long-delayed bug fixes? In this situation there's really remarkably little you can do except have the legal department go to war, or start from scratch-- neither of which was probably feasible. -Antonio Romero romero@confidence.princeton.edu
ignac@electro.UUCP (Ignac Kolenko) (04/04/89)
In article <1419@atari.UUCP> kbad@atari.UUCP (Ken Badertscher) writes: >In article <446@electro.UUCP> ignac@electro.UUCP (Ignac Kolenko) writes: >|unfortunately, it doesn't look like there are gonna be any more versions >|from microsoft. so the initial version is the final version. > > That's interesting, Ignac. Where do you get your information? >Last I heard, we are trying to entice Microsoft into updating Write. > >|i don't understand why atari just didn't hire any programmers to fix the >|damn bugs in write. > > Because the damn program belongs to Microsoft, and we don't have the damn >source code. It's damn difficult to hire damn programmers to fix the damn >bugs when you have no damn source. as to my information, i have a friend who had a few work terms at microsoft as a programmer back when they released write. he informed me that microsoft basically just got the program to a working state, then gave the executable to atari to market, since ms has absolutely no interest in any other machine or market than ibm or macintosh. microsoft was supposedly under contract to make updates only if atari was able to sell 50000 copies of ms write, and so far i don't think that they have reached that goal. as to having atari fix the source: stupid comment on my part. i will try to keep my yap shut about things like that in further comments on the net. i stand corrected!!!!! sorry!!! :-) but, write came out, lemee see, what three years ago, and only now you're trying to "entice" microsoft to update it???? to me, that just sounds like microsoft has absolutely no interest in doing anything with the program. (no fault found with atari on this point) interesting to note: my friend from microsoft even had a copy of an internal ms write version that had special code to speed up screen displays when using the standard st font, which i don't believe made it into the release version. this is the version that i have played around with a couple of times and based my comments on. (it may be that his internal version had extra bugs that the release version didn't have.) but that fact alone shows that microsoft itself thought the word pro was just TOO slow. since write was a port from the macintosh, where the program actually, keeps up with a fast typing speed, the reason for the slowness in the atari version must lie in the non-optimized code in atari GDOS, and GEM itself, which handles the plotting of fonts to the screen. >|as it stands, ms write is usable for small jobs. for any large word processing >|jobs, you just can't trust it. > > MS Write is used for Atari internal engineering documentation, and is >being used to maintain and upgrade the developer documentation. It is >a very powerful word processor. i don't disagree with you there Ken. you seem to be a pretty cool guy when it comes to answering problems about the atari computer, so i don't want to get on your bad side (the more friends from atari, the better for all of us!!!) in fact, i wasn't trying to tick anyone off with my "review", but don't you guys find it a little cumbersome trying to edit any document over five or six pages in length. scrolling back and forth is just way to slow. screen updates when you have many font styles on the screen just crawl. this of course is a programmer talking who is accustomed to the lightning speed of screen updates in the text editor tempus. > > I admit, I must sound like I'm gushing, or "holding the company line," ya, it does. but blaming the installation procedures of GDOS as the reason of why write is such a pain to use is not the direction you should be heading. i have always wondered why there *seems* to be no attempt to rewrite ALL of GEM in assembly. if atari has any chance to gain access to the business market here in north america, a *FAST* graphics operating system is a definate necessity. the mac roms are written in assembly, and that operating system really flies (same processor as the atari, yet drastically different apparent speeds!!!) if you guys rewrite ALL font handling code in GEM and GDOS in assembly (or at least use an optimizing compiler), things will suddenly look good for ms write and atari in general. well, keep up the good work Ken. it's nice to even be flamed from atari once in a while. :-) :-) :-) it shows that there is activity down there in sunnyvale. :-) (ps: i was able to see a demo of the ATW on the weekend. wow!!! nice machine. if atari can get it out to the market real soon, atari may be able to make a small fortune. good work atari!!!! pps: software demoed: x-windows, c-compier (*very* intelligent linker!!! the "hello world" program with full window handling was only about 2K long. better than most C compilers on, say, the ibm pc. nice graphic demos. helios seems to be a pretty robust operating system, but with 7 or 8 graphics demos running at the same time, things began to bog down. but then again, so does our sun 3/60 when running a similar number of colour demos. i wish i had 6 grand to plunk down on this machine!!!) -- Ignac A. Kolenko (The Ig) watmath!watcgl!electro!ignac "Those who can't, criticize" (author unknown) "ain't it ironic that according to Rushton, Suzuki is right!"
rjung@sal22.usc.edu (Robert allen Jung) (04/04/89)
In article <458@electro.UUCP> ignac@electro.UUCP (Ignac Kolenko) writes: >In article <1419@atari.UUCP> kbad@atari.UUCP (Ken Badertscher) writes: >> [Much talk about Atari ST's Microsoft Write, as well as the revelation >> there there might be an upgrade, deleted] > >as to my information, i have a friend who had a few work terms at microsoft as >a programmer back when they released write. he informed me that microsoft >basically just got the program to a working state, then gave the executable to >atari to market, since ms has absolutely no interest in any other machine or >market than ibm or macintosh. If they don't want us, we don't want them. Besides, what makes Microsoft God? B-) B-) B-) B-) B-) B-) B-) B-) B-) B-) >interesting to note: my friend from microsoft even had a copy of an internal ms >write version that had special code to speed up screen displays when using the >standard st font, which i don't believe made it into the release version. I'm not too familliar with Write, but I believe you WILL get this if you run the program _without_ GDOS. But then you won't get nifty fonts on your printouts... >the reason for the slowness in the atari >version must lie in the non-optimized code in atari GDOS, and GEM itself, which >handles the plotting of fonts to the screen. It MUST? I'd like to see the documentation supporting this... You want my idea? Atari Corp. should go talk to Neocept. Let Atari license _WordUp_ from Neocept, and release it with some more improvements over the current 1.30 version (True footnoting, a spell checker/thesarus, index builder). If Atari releases such a monster UNDER THE ATARI NAME, it has the potential to blow the doors off EVERYTHING out there (especially if this entire package costs around $100) Then again, I'm a drooling fan of WordUp, so my idea may be a bit biased. B-) >Ignac A. Kolenko (The Ig) watmath!watcgl!electro!ignac >"Those who can't, criticize" (author unknown) "A critic is a man with no legs telling you how to run." --R.J. B-) ============================================================================= Disclaimer: This message was written with my authorization # ## # # ## # Mailing address: rjung@nunki.usc.edu ## ## ## (It's easier to just use the reply function, tho) #### ## ####