silvert@dalcs.UUCP (Bill Silvert) (08/18/88)
I just got my Publishing Partner Professional upgrade (mailed
Aug. 5), and it is a total loss. Thick binder with only a few
pages, one disk. Whatever you do, it crashes or hangs.
Absolutely useless. Here are some of the gory details:
When you boot it up you get either inverse video (white on black)
in mono or gruesome red and green on the colour monitor. There
are commands to change the colours, but they don't work. Not
only is the resultant screen ugly and hard on the eyes, but the
various line types don't always show up very well.
I opened a column and entered some text. On the first try
nothing appeared. On the second try I got some text into the
window, but half of it mysteriously vanished while I was in the
process of changing font size.
I started again, opened a column, and imported the distribution
file BUGS.TXT. It seemed to import OK, although if you use the
wrong option it crashes. Then I tried to print it -- the font
turned out to be wide bold, and it ran off the edge of my page
(this is a C. Itoh 8510 ProWriter). I tried to reset the font in
the menu (bold, italic, etc.) but the menu doesn't work --
nothing happens when you click on on an item.
So next I opened a two-column page and imported the same text.
The columns were linked, but after filling up the first column,
PPP superimposed the material on what was already in the first
column! So I ended up with one column of junk and one empty
column. I tried to print it and got two bombs.
By the way, although PPP is supposed to come with about 6 fonts,
it doesn't even have those yet -- my disk included Times,
Helvetica, and Hudson. At least they dropped that stupid System
font default. I don't know whether the old fonts are compatible
-- I would hate to lose Courier and Symbol.
That is about as far as I got. There is no value whatsoever in
using the present release. I hear that SoftLogik had to ship in
order to avoid charges of mail fraud in the US, but they would
have a hard time defending this product!
The only good thing I can say about PPP is that the DOC files are
incompatible with PP 1.02 -- most people see this as a major flaw
(as I would if PPP worked), but imagine the frustration if
someone ruined a working DOC file by loading it into PPP!
Does anyone know if SoftLogik is solvent enough to provide
refunds? It is hard to believe that the company can survive a
disaster of this magnitude.
--
Bill Silvert, Habitat Ecology Division.
Bedford Institute of Oceanography, Dartmouth, NS, Canada B2Y 4A2
UUCP: ...!{uunet,utai,watmath}!dalcs!biomel!bill
CDN: biomel@cs.dal.CDN BITNET: bs%dalcs@dalac.BITNETlean@sbcs.sunysb.edu (Lean L. Loh) (08/21/88)
In article <2992@dalcs.UUCP>, silvert@dalcs.UUCP (Bill Silvert) writes: > I just got my Publishing Partner Professional upgrade (mailed > Aug. 5), and it is a total loss. Thick binder with only a few > pages, one disk. Whatever you do, it crashes or hangs. > Absolutely useless. Here are some of the gory details: > ...... etc. By July, Publishing Partner Professinal was very much behind schedule (at least 6 months). SoftLogik did an informal poll and the response was that most people wanted SoftLogik to ship PP Professinal immediately, eventhough the product was far from finished. What we all received is a VERY VERY unfinished product. The problem was that SoftLogik didn't make that clear in the package that we all received. Yes, the program we received is almost totally useless. The final product should ship within one month. With regard to the fonts, there will be altogether 6 fonts and specific printer drivers. What we see in the diskette we received are generic printer drivers. Hopefully, the final package will be as good as promised. And the full manual will be sent when the final product is ready to go. We just have to keep our fingers crossed for now. What I don't understand is how this product got to be 7 months late and is still unfinished. --Lean -- if you can dream it, you can do it. CSNET:lean@sbcs.csnet ... go sleep ARPA:lean%suny-sb.csnet@csnet-relay.arpa UUCP:{allegra, hocsd, philabs, ogcvax}!sbcs!lean
Robert.Lisowski@rubbs1.FIDONET.ORG (Robert Lisowski) (08/21/88)
The release of PPP that they shipped is NOT THE FINAL RELEASE!!!
IT IS A SNEAK PREVIEW!!!!!
THEY SAID IT WOULD NOT WORK!!!!!
EVERYBODY KEEP YOUR PANTS ON!!!!
I can't understand WHY there are so many people out there who think
this is the ACTUAL PRODUCT. IT IS NOT, and THEY SAID SO.
THAT BIG BINDER WILL BE FULL when they send the first release to you.
I know that everybody is getting impatient. I placed my order when
it was first announced that the program was in development. They
SHIPPED A BETA so that their LOYAL customers, who stayed with them,
would get to see SOME of the features and read about others. They
wanted to assure everybody that it will be WORTH THE WAIT.
A comparable program, if offered for a different machine, and done
by a big company with a bunch of authors would cost $500.00 or more!
But instead, there is one author, so you have to wait, but it will
cost $120.00!!! Those of us who "upgraded" from the old PP only
paid about half of that (the offer has expired, so it's no longer
available)!
I used to be angry, but when I saw what was going into that program,
I stopped getting angry, and started getting happy. THAT PROGRAM
WILL BE THE BEST DTP PROGRAM ON ANY MACHINE!!! You will be able,
through its open architecture, to use import and export drivers,
multiple screen fonts for increased realism while using small and
large characters of the same font on the screen, and other GREAT
FEATURES. The program will handle ANY GRAPHICS FORMAT for import,
and lets you ROTATE BOTH GRAPHICS AND TEXT.
So, INSTEAD OF COMPLAINING (you're not going to get it faster by
doing that), why don't you ENCOURAGE them and tell them what
features you would like to see (drivers, etc.).
I hope that everybody reading this message will tell everyone they
know, who has the beta, about this message. Maybe we can calm some
people down.
Rob
--
Robert Lisowski - via FidoNet node 1:107/330
UUCP: ...!rutgers!rubbs1!Robert.Lisowski
ARPA: Robert.Lisowski@rubbs1.FIDONET.ORG
\...!rutgers!rubbs1!Robert.Lisowskiwes@obie.UUCP (Barnacle Wes) (08/24/88)
In article <28.230E70ED@rubbs1.FIDONET.ORG>, Robert.Lisowski@rubbs1.FIDONET.ORG (Robert Lisowski) writes:
% The release of PPP that they shipped is NOT THE FINAL RELEASE!!!
%
% IT IS A SNEAK PREVIEW!!!!!
%
% THEY SAID IT WOULD NOT WORK!!!!!
%
% EVERYBODY KEEP YOUR PANTS ON!!!!
In the meantime, the Timeworks DTP, written by GST (The First Word
folks) runs great on the Mega-2 and INCLUDES GDOS drivers for Epson,
Star, Atari dot matrix printers, and HP, Atari, and OKI laser printers.
I bought it for about $82 (US) at a local ST shop. Nice, slick
interface. You should see my copies of the ST Pro Gem articles now!
--
{hpda, uwmcsd1}!sp7040!obie!wes
"Happiness lies in being priviledged to work hard for
long hours in doing whatever you think is worth doing."
-- Robert A. Heinlein --silvert@dalcs.UUCP (Bill Silvert) (08/28/88)
In article <28.230E70ED@rubbs1.FIDONET.ORG> Robert.Lisowski@rubbs1.FIDONET.ORG (Robert Lisowski) writes: >The release of PPP that they shipped is NOT THE FINAL RELEASE!!! > > IT IS A SNEAK PREVIEW!!!!! > THEY SAID IT WOULD NOT WORK!!!!! > EVERYBODY KEEP YOUR PANTS ON!!!! >I can't understand WHY there are so many people out there who think >this is the ACTUAL PRODUCT. IT IS NOT, and THEY SAID SO. I have heard several reports that there are discussions on US networks along the line of Lisowski's remarks. Well, They told me that they wouldn't charge me until they shipped the product, but they billed me in June for a "Sneak preview" that I don't want that was shipped in August. I am only interested in working versions. The literature enclosed with the shipment did NOT say that "it would not work", although it acknowledged a few bugs. I really like PP, so I will wait and pray, but what they told me is not what they told Lisowski. -- Bill Silvert, Habitat Ecology Division. Bedford Institute of Oceanography, Dartmouth, NS, Canada B2Y 4A2 UUCP: ...!{uunet,utai,watmath}!dalcs!biomel!bill CDN: biomel@cs.dal.CDN BITNET: bs%dalcs@dalac.BITNET
ritchie@hpldola.HP.COM (Dave Ritchie) (09/18/88)
I was looking through one of the Amiga rags he other day and - surprise - Soft Logik is doing a PP for the Amiga. Isn't that strange? Dave
rjung@sal6.usc.edu (Robert allen Jung) (09/21/88)
In article <11830008@hpldola.HP.COM> ritchie@hpldola.HP.COM (Dave Ritchie) writes: > I was looking through one of the Amiga rags he other day and - surprise - >Soft Logik is doing a PP for the Amiga. Isn't that strange? Nope. Quality software eventually gets translated for lesser machines. B-) --R.J. B-) ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- Disclaimer: These are my views, and mine alone. # ## # Mailing address: Beats me, just reply to this message # ## # (rjung@sa132.usc.edu?) ## ## ## #### ## ####
c60a-1bq@e260-4f.berkeley.edu (nunnayourbiznezz) (09/22/88)
In article <11830008@hpldola.HP.COM> ritchie@hpldola.HP.COM (Dave Ritchie) writes: > > I was looking through one of the Amiga rags he other day and - surprise - >Soft Logik is doing a PP for the Amiga. Isn't that strange? > > Dave Yes and no. It's not strange that a company is porting it's (good) product over to another machine. What is strange is that they didn't do this sooner. They would have their foot in the door, as the Amiga has good draw programs, but few solid DTP programs (esp. at PP's price). John Kawakami Please send replies to c91a-ra@franny instead of this address (where this originates from).
richard@pande.UUCP (richard) (10/01/88)
In article <1425@nunki.usc.edu> rjung@sal6.usc.edu (Robert allen Jung) writes: >> I was looking through one of the Amiga rags he other day and - surprise - >>Soft Logik is doing a PP for the Amiga. Isn't that strange? > > Nope. Quality software eventually gets translated for lesser machines. B-) Nope. If you talk to the author you will discover that PP was written for the ST first because ``If we could make it work on that pig, we could make it work on anything.'' I'm only in this for the mummy. richard@gryphon.CTS.COM {well connected site}!gryphon!richard
rupp@cod.NOSC.MIL (William L. Rupp) (10/05/88)
In article <119@pande.UUCP> richard@gryphon.CTS.COM () writes: >In article <1425@nunki.usc.edu> rjung@sal6.usc.edu (Robert allen Jung) writes: >>> I was looking through one of the Amiga rags he other day and - surprise - >>>Soft Logik is doing a PP for the Amiga. Isn't that strange? >> >> Nope. Quality software eventually gets translated for lesser machines. B-) > >Nope. If you talk to the author you will discover that PP was written >for the ST first because ``If we could make it work on that pig, we >could make it work on anything.'' > > I'm only in this for the mummy. >richard@gryphon.CTS.COM {well connected site}!gryphon!richard This is the kind of statement which, on the face of it, appears very, very difficult to take seriously. If the author of PP really thinks the ST is a dog (er, sorry, I mean a pig), it would be stupid wasting time trying to develop software for it just to prove it can be done. This is a little like the story I read years ago about the track coach who had his runners run with weights on during practice on the theory that running without them in the real meet would help them run faster. In the actual track meet, his runners did poorly; the strategy of runninng with weights proved to have no relevance to running faster without them. By the same token, if you want to develop programs on system A, spending time working on system B (or system ST :-) would make little sense. The only reason a serious programmer (i.e., one who is a professional) would have to develop a massive program on a specific system would be to sell that program to users of the system and make money. You don't spend months and months working with no hope of return on effort unless you are a dilettante. I suspect that if PP's author really did say this, and we only have unsubstantiated heresay evidence to that effect, it was meant as a joke. Which brings me to my final comment; why can't we have more informative disucssions of programs such as PP instead of the foolish remark which prompted this response? Well, I was just asking! Bill ------- who represents only himself in his Usenet postings ----------