ras@skippy.UUCP (Bob Surtees) (01/07/90)
I have seen a couple of reviews on Paragon's Word Processor Nisus and, as a result of playing around with the demo version, am almost at the point of purchasing a copy. Does anyone out there have any experience with this product for serious word processing and had a chance to compare it to some of the other *heavies* that are in common use? I currently use WordPerfect and was thinking of Nisus as a second WP over Word. -- Bob Surtees (ras@skippy.UUCP) Home = 42.51'N 71.25'W Digital Equipment Corporation UUCP (...!decvax!skippy!ras) Nashua, NH DNET (SKANDA::SURTEES)
yahnke@vms.macc.wisc.edu (Ross Yahnke, MACC) (01/08/90)
In article <422@skippy.UUCP>, ras@skippy.UUCP (Bob Surtees) writes... -I have seen a couple of reviews on Paragon's Word Processor Nisus and, as a -result of playing around with the demo version, am almost at the point of -purchasing a copy. - -Does anyone out there have any experience with this product for serious -word processing and had a chance to compare it to some of the other -*heavies* that are in common use? I currently use WordPerfect and was Nisus is an extremely well thought out product, with no where near the madness inherent in MS-Word's interface. (I've never used WP...). The search & replace facilities - based on GREP - are top notch, allowing s & r combinations just not possible in other packages. And combining that with the catalog window, allowing you to s & r thru all open files is incredibly useful. It's easy to learn but definitely a power-users app, you can really grow into it. On the downside, it keeps the whole document(s) being edited in RAM, thereby limiting document size, (esp. one w/a lot of graphics). With a 1 meg MF partition I started having memory-lo problems with around 20 pages of document. And when you start running low on RAM, watch out! I got into some bad situations where Nisus would refuse to save my document due to lo RAM. Not good, I lost several hours of work, even after trying all the suggestions in the manual. It did crash on a lo memory situation and also once when doing a Find operation, so there are still a few bugs to work out. The graphics integration is real nice, they've included basically a subset of MacDraw. How graphics get anchored to the document is some- what flaky tho, graphics tend to jump unpredictably from page to page when they're near a page border. Biggest strike against Nisus is their well written manual. The problem is that it comes with about FIFTY replacement pages that you have to insert, PLUS a HUGE list of erratas that make you have to go thru the manual page by page crossing out and adding text via ballpoint pen, PLUS (!!!) a read.me doc that has yet even MORE errata, even a page of text that you're s'posed to print out and insert in yur manual. Manual construction took me a good three hours, RIDICULOUS! Despite the glitches which I hope Paragon will iron out, I'll stick with Nisus over Word any day. >>> Internet: yahnke@macc.wisc.edu <<< >>> Mille voix chuchottent <<c'est vrai>> <<<
frank@mnetor.UUCP (Frank Kolnick) (01/09/90)
In article <2941@dogie.macc.wisc.edu> yahnke@vms.macc.wisc.edu (Ross Yahnke, MACC) writes: >In article <422@skippy.UUCP>, ras@skippy.UUCP (Bob Surtees) writes... >-I have seen a couple of reviews on Paragon's Word Processor Nisus and, as a >-result of playing around with the demo version, am almost at the point of >-purchasing a copy. >- >-Does anyone out there have any experience with this product for serious >-word processing and had a chance to compare it to some of the other >-*heavies* that are in common use? I currently use WordPerfect and was > >Nisus is an extremely well thought out product, with no where near the >madness inherent in MS-Word's interface. (I've never used WP...). The >search & replace facilities - based on GREP - are top notch, allowing >s & r combinations just not possible in other packages. And combining >that with the catalog window, allowing you to s & r thru all open files >is incredibly useful. It's easy to learn but definitely a power-users >app, you can really grow into it. >... I'll keep this brief (I can see a war on the horizon :-)... When Nisus was released, I ordered their demo disk, as I was frustrated with Word. I spent about a week trying to convert a chapter of a book I was writing to Nisus. This is a *lot* of work because Nisus doesn't understand Word files and doesn't have the equivalent of style sheets (no, char. styles are *not* the same). Anyway, my conclusion was that, while I'd really like to have all of the nice *extra* features that Nisus provides, but I couldn't live without the *essential* features that Word provides (more flexible paragraph spacing, for example). And with Word 4, I find I actually like its interface, which I think is cleaner and less cluttered than Nisus (I'm not fond of little icons all over my screen). Now, as always, choose the wp that provides the functions you need with the interface with which you feel most comfortable. In my opinion, Nisus is a very good, medium-power wp, perhaps in the class of MacWrite. Try before you buy. -- Frank Kolnick, consulting for, and therefore expressing opinions independent of, Computer X UUCP: {allegra, linus}!utzoo!mnetor!frank
ack@eleazar.dartmouth.edu (Andy J. Williams) (01/09/90)
In article <422@skippy.UUCP> ras@skippy.UUCP (Bob Surtees) writes: >I have seen a couple of reviews on Paragon's Word Processor Nisus and, as a >result of playing around with the demo version, am almost at the point of >purchasing a copy. >Does anyone out there have any experience with this product for serious >word processing and had a chance to compare it to some of the other >*heavies* that are in common use? I currently use WordPerfect and was >thinking of Nisus as a second WP over Word. At this point, I have decided to stay with Word 4.0 (even if it is somewhat slow...) The reasons: 1) Nisus doesn't have any style sheets. Granted, you can make macros to go through and emulate them, but that is a little too much work for a simple feature which Word already has built in. 2) It doesn't have true WYSIWYG when editing multiple columns. I often do Newsletters and page layout work and need this feature for my design work. 3) As far as I can tell (I am working off the demo) it does not seem to have good control of text wraps around graphics. When I drew a sample Mac screen in a design document (using the built-in graphics layer) and set the text to wrap around it, the text wrapped right up to the exact edge of the graphic. There was no way that I could see to set a 0.25 inch or so space between the graphic and the text. In the end I had to draw a white rectangle with white edges which was slightly larger than the original rectangle. Again, I do not have the manual and this is a demo copy. 4) I can't afford it now. So, all in all, I really like Nisus a lot. I think that 3.0 will probably be very well done and may then make me shell out the money. Until then, and since I've taken the necessary time to learn how to do what I need to do in Word (all 6 months of it :-) :-), I am not going to switch right now. >Bob Surtees (ras@skippy.UUCP) Home = 42.51'N 71.25'W >Digital Equipment Corporation UUCP (...!decvax!skippy!ras) >Nashua, NH DNET (SKANDA::SURTEES) -ajw -- Andy J. Williams '90 Systems Programmer, Kiewit Computation Center Dartmouth College Macintosh Interface Design, Critique & Programming 603-643-2177 (Well, that's my job until June. What then?) ack@dartmouth.edu "Argue for your limitations, and they're yours" - R. Bach
dt@mathcs.emory.edu (Dave Taylor {guest}) (01/09/90)
Well, I went for it! I decided that I would go with the underdog, and am glad I did. As everyone knows by now, Nisus does pack a lot of features, but are they useful. I would say - yes! The macro language is the ulimate. That together with the grep functions pack a powerful punch. It first I didn't like the idea of having to work with on mail merging 'macros', but now that I know what I'm doing it's really great. If you don't enjoy custom designing macros, then it may not be worth the hassle, but to be quite honest, I found the manual VERY clear and well layed out. The examples were relavent and complete. I am also running it on a Mac plus - 1 meg and at time it seems a little slow is getting started. As well don't try and insert with the clipboard a post- script graphic image. It may take up to 5 minutes (literally) to place it in the document. The machine does warn you however and you can put it in "quick and dirty." Because of my limited memory and inability to run Multifinder, I find it amazing fun to be able to just draw a graphic right over my text. I'm not a hard duty, mega-wp user, but I DO think that Nisus is something to be reckened with. Cheers, David Taylor P.S. I wanted a German spelling checker and Word only supplied Spanish.
jem@sm.luth.se (Jan Erik Mostr|m) (01/09/90)
ras@skippy.UUCP (Bob Surtees) writes:
# I have seen a couple of reviews on Paragon's Word Processor Nisus and, as a
# result of playing around with the demo version, am almost at the point of
# purchasing a copy.
# Does anyone out there have any experience with this product for serious
# word processing and had a chance to compare it to some of the other
# *heavies* that are in common use? I currently use WordPerfect and was
# thinking of Nisus as a second WP over Word.
# --
# Bob Surtees (ras@skippy.UUCP) Home = 42.51'N 71.25'W
# Digital Equipment Corporation UUCP (...!decvax!skippy!ras)
# Nashua, NH DNET (SKANDA::SURTEES)
Ok, here are my feelings about Nisus.
Shortly: BUY IT !!
Why ? I could list lots of things but here's the most important ones
1. Regexp. This is USEFUL. Is as powerful as regexp in sed, perl etc
2. Macros. You can define macros that simplifies you're work. You
can define powerful macros with ease, none of the other
WP I've tried has anything compared to it.
3. Style sheets. You can define stationaries that contains headers etc
4. You can change the behaviour of Nisus by setting the preferences
according to your taste.
5. Markers. Easy to define a marker that you later can use in a
number of ways.
6. Spelling/Checker, Thesaurus. The spelling checker isn't as fast
as WriteNow's but it's faster than most.
7. Contents/Index. Easy to define and use.
8. The ability to define you own command keys (shortcuts)
9. User styles. You can predefine your own styles i.e.
Times-12-bold and then quickly change between them. This doesn't
works exactly as I like it but it works.
10. Graphics. You can make drawings quickly inside your document
without leaving Nisus.
11. Footnotes/Headers/Footers/Endnotes. Nisus got them now
So far this is the Mac WP I like best. I've tried MacWrite II, WriteNow,
Word and quickly read the manuals of FullWrite but I like Nisus best.
jem
Jan Erik Mostr|m jem@sm.luth.se (ARPA : jem%sm.luth.se@ucbvax.berkeley.edu)
Univ. of Lulea,Sweden (Bitnet: jem%sm.luth.se@sekth.bitnet)baumgart@esquire.dpw.com (Steve Baumgarten) (01/10/90)
In article <5200@mnetor.UUCP>, frank@mnetor (Frank Kolnick) writes: >When Nisus was released, I ordered their demo disk, as I was >frustrated with Word. I spent about a week trying to convert a chapter >of a book I was writing to Nisus. This is a *lot* of work because >Nisus doesn't understand Word files and doesn't have the Hmm. Nisus doesn't understand Word styles, but it should convert Word documents without any trouble. I've converted all of mine (some needed some minor touchup, but there were no major headaches). You can't convert documents saved in "Fast Save" format, though. Maybe this was your problem? >equivalent of style sheets (no, char. styles are *not* the same). This is true, but it's easily worked around. I suspect it would be more of a problem if you were working in a group and wanted to have a readily definable "Heading" style (or something like that). But since styles are local to Word documents (at least the DOS version of Word stores them separately), I don't see what the big advantage is. Nisus has a simple way to change text and/or attributes from one thing to something else. You can easily change all the "Nisus"'s in your document from bold to italic. Very straightforward. But I agree, sometimes styles are better. >Anyway, my conclusion was that, while I'd really like to have all >of the nice *extra* features that Nisus provides, but I couldn't live >without the *essential* features that Word provides (more flexible >paragraph spacing, for example). And with Word 4, I find I actually >like its interface, which I think is cleaner and less cluttered than >Nisus (I'm not fond of little icons all over my screen). I really have to disagree with you here, but I won't try to convince you. But the recent discussion in this group of how to get fonts to show up in Word's font menu points out serious interface flaws that Microsoft has never (and probably will never) address. Nisus's interface is *very* clear and easy to understand (although I will grant that it relies on perhaps a few too many icons). Yet once you understand what those icons mean, it makes the program very simple and intuitive to operate. Sort of like the finder, I guess. There are very few modal dialogs in Nisus, which is a big plus. Cut and paste work *everywhere* -- even the Edit menu works. This is great for novices, who haven't learned (from badly conceived software like Word) that "you can't do that here." >Now, as always, choose the wp that provides the functions you need >with the interface with which you feel most comfortable. In my >opinion, Nisus is a very good, medium-power wp, perhaps in the class >of MacWrite. Try before you buy. No, it's significantly more powerful than MacWrite, but not much more difficult to use. It lags behind Word in a couple of areas (no automatic table creation -- a very nice feature of Word 4; mail-merge is a bit kludgy (relies on macros); and true styles would be nice), but is far superior in many others: o Unlimited undo and redo. This is a big help since it lets you back out of many changes. I've used it many times to get my document back to the state it was in 5 minutes earlier -- after I'd made dozens of changes. You can't do that with any other Mac application (that I'm aware of). o 10 clipboards. Implemented in such a way that even a novice can make use of them. And once you have more than a single clipboard, you wonder how you ever got along without this feature. o Macros to let you do nearly anything you want. One of my favorites is one they supply you with: It goes through your document and changes letter combinations like "ff", "fi", etc. into the appropriate ligatures, then prints the document, then changes them back (for ease of editing). The macro itself is quite straightforward and could have been designed by anyone with a little computer experience. First time users, though, might have difficulty creating the more advance macros, although macros can be recorded, which makes things easier. o Integrated drawing and text around/on top of/with graphics. o Saves files as TEXT documents (formatting in the resource fork). I thought this was particularly neat, since it allows you to open your Nisus documents with DAs like miniWRITER or whatever. The TEXT portion is quite readable, so this gives you a quick way to browse through your files when you're doing something else. I've opened/copied/uploaded portions of my Nisus files when I was online in Versaterm. o Sophisticated searching through open and closed documents. This is incredibly useful, since not only do you have full regular expression search and replace (including an "EZ" mode that allows novices to search for things like returns, tabs, etc. without resorting to Word's bizarre "^p" syntax), but you can also search through hundreds of Nisus and TEXT files very quickly, without going through the bother of opening each one. o Excellent footnote and index/table of contents handling. I could go on, but suffice it to say that I was very happy I made the switch from Word to Nisus. It's really on a par with Word in terms of features, the interface is wonderful, and the support is great. Even the manual is great (once you've inserted the errata sheets they give you -- something I could have lived without). So give it a try if you're looking for something a little more powerful than MacWrite or WriteNow, or if you're just sick of Word's idiosyncrasies and bizarro interface. -- Steve Baumgarten | "New York... when civilization falls apart, Davis Polk & Wardwell | remember, we were way ahead of you." baumgart@esquire.dpw.com | cmcl2!esquire!baumgart | - David Letterman
frank@mnetor.UUCP (Frank Kolnick) (01/10/90)
In article <1712@esquire.UUCP> baumgart@esquire.dpw.com (Steve Baumgarten) writes: >Hmm. Nisus doesn't understand Word styles, but it should convert Word >documents without any trouble. I've converted all of mine (some >needed some minor touchup, but there were no major headaches). You >can't convert documents saved in "Fast Save" format, though. Maybe >this was your problem? No, 'fast save' was not the problem. Besides styles, Word has numerous features (like 'space before' for paragraphs) that Nisus just doesn't understand. I'm sure there's a lower common denominator that converts easily, but my document didn't. >>equivalent of style sheets (no, char. styles are *not* the same). > >This is true, but it's easily worked around. I suspect it would be >more of a problem if you were working in a group and wanted to have a >readily definable "Heading" style (or something like that). But since >styles are local to Word documents (at least the DOS version of Word >stores them separately), I don't see what the big advantage is. > >Nisus has a simple way to change text and/or attributes from one thing >to something else. You can easily change all the "Nisus"'s in your >document from bold to italic. Very straightforward. Definitely not. I spent 15 minutes with Nisus' tech. support, and we agreed it couldn't be done. I doubt if there are many style sheets that are a simple as 'all headers are italic (or whatever)'. You can't just replace all italicized text by bold, for example. Some of those italics may be in other style sheets, or in no style sheet at all. Nisus simply does not have style sheets. >>Anyway, my conclusion was that, while I'd really like to have all >>of the nice *extra* features that Nisus provides, but I couldn't live >>without the *essential* features that Word provides (more flexible >>paragraph spacing, for example). And with Word 4, I find I actually >>like its interface, which I think is cleaner and less cluttered than >>Nisus (I'm not fond of little icons all over my screen). > >I really have to disagree with you here, but I won't try to convince >you. But the recent discussion in this group of how to get fonts to >show up in Word's font menu points out serious interface flaws that >Microsoft has never (and probably will never) address. ... I *like* Word's font menu. It lets me choose the fonts I need for the document, and the method is consistent across all menus. But that's beside the point. I was trying to emphasize that this is an area of personal opinion. A long feature list is not the solution. The features I (or anyone else) *needs* is the primary criterion. Sure, I'd like to have the regular expressions, but I need the tables and the extra paragraph formatting options. I would also prefer my wp *not* to have built-in drawing tools. I have yet to see one that allows me to abandon separate drawing apps, which let me create drawings and store them, print them, etc. separately, without taking up memory when I'm just typing. My personal preference (this is *opinion*, ok?) is to have a wp, several drawing packages, and a high-end page layout program (XPress), along with numerous DAs (like Vantage) to fill in the gaps. As I said, each person should evaluate the candidate products in his/her own environment. -- Frank Kolnick, consulting for, and therefore expressing opinions independent of, Computer X UUCP: {allegra, linus}!utzoo!mnetor!frank
long@mcntsh.enet.dec.com (Richard C. Long) (01/12/90)
In article <5206@mnetor.UUCP>, frank@mnetor.UUCP (Frank Kolnick) writes... >In article <1712@esquire.UUCP> baumgart@esquire.dpw.com (Steve Baumgarten) writes: >>Hmm. Nisus doesn't understand Word styles, but it should convert Word >>documents without any trouble. I've converted all of mine (some [deleted] > [deleted] >understand. I'm sure there's a lower common denominator that converts >easily, but my document didn't. Word can save in MacWrite format; have you tried that? Can Nisus even convert it? BTW, I'd like Nisus a lot better if it did have style sheets. That's one feature I LOVE about Word. [more stuff deleted about Word's interface & font menu] I don't understand all this griping about Word's interface. True, v3.* was somewhat idiosyncratic, but I think Microsoft has done an excellent job with Word 4. Menus and key assignments are completely customizable, and all fonts show up automatically in the font menu. Moreover, it doesn't require umpteen-billion megabytes of memory, like some other word processors I could name ;-). Good job, Microsoft! Rich
lai@Apple.COM (Ed Lai) (01/12/90)
One thing I hear about Nisus is that it is the editor that is most compatiable with the script manager, especially for version 2.0.4. So if that is a consideration, it is about the only choice. /* Disclaimer: All statments and opinions expressed are my own */ /* Edmund K. Lai */ /* Apple Computer, MS75-6J */ /* 20525 Mariani Ave, */ /* Cupertino, CA 95014 */ /* (408)974-6272 */ zW@h9cOi