ianf@nada.kth.se (Ian Feldman) (09/19/89)
In article <1697@draken.nada.kth.se> d88-jwa@nada.kth.se (Jon W{tte) writes: >I need a word processor and editor (mostly the latter) that DOESN'T DELETE >in the resource fork of the document. It can add it's own resources allright, >but what's there has to be there when I save and quit, or else I'm out of the >game... > >The question: Since NISUS seems to be such a good buy, how does it handle the >resource fork ? I'd really like to know ! Unfortunately it does just that - deletes the entire resource fork of an existing (say McSink) TEXT file - and gives you no _preselectable_ automatic option to resave it as a TEXT document without affecting its already existing resource fork or changing the original creator field to one of its own. This is, clearly, a mistake of such vast proportions that it renders Nisus <<effectively>> unusable in a multi-programming- tool environment. Mind you, I'm talking about version 1.0. I keep hearing that in spite of the newly released 2.0 which is, accordingly to many, "an improvement", a (Paragon) programmer already was mentioning an upcoming 3.0 release. My, my. Tell you something, Paragon. Call me when you decided if Nisus is to be a MS-Word-class word processor or a super-duper programming editor with word processing capabilities. I could use the latter provided that you you fixed some of the stupid deficiencies that are present in the 1.0 ("jump to beg/ end of doc, next/previous paragraph | sentence | word executed in the form of interpreted macros & not listening to command/ shift/ option arrow keys". Real sloooow; I could laugh a night away if I wasn't so pissed off with the result. Other examples of such non-quite-well- designed features too numerous to mention but available on request) That is, call me if you're reading this, which I doubt in the first place.... so much for the (implied) product support where it really counts.... which should be right here, on usenet, and _not_ primarily available only by telephone within the geographics limits of US of A. Geography and user-support don't mix! -- ---- You just survived another load of gross exaggerations from ------- Ian Feldman, the ASCII hacker / "I work to live, not the ---------- ianf@nada.kth.se / ianf@sekth.bitnet / other way around" ------------- ianf%nada.kth.se@uunet.uu.net / uunet!nada.kth.se!ianf
svc@well.UUCP (Leonard Rosenthol) (09/21/89)
In article <1707@draken.nada.kth.se> ianf@nada.kth.se (Ian Feldman) writes: >In article <1697@draken.nada.kth.se> d88-jwa@nada.kth.se (Jon W{tte) writes: > >> [original question about resource fork maintance] > > Unfortunately it does just that - deletes the entire resource fork > of an existing (say McSink) TEXT file - and gives you no _preselectable_ > automatic option to resave it as a TEXT document without affecting its > already existing resource fork or changing the original creator field > to one of its own. This is, clearly, a mistake of such vast proportions > that it renders Nisus <<effectively>> unusable in a multi-programming- > tool environment. Mind you, I'm talking about version 1.0. I keep > hearing that in spite of the newly released 2.0 which is, accordingly > to many, "an improvement", a (Paragon) programmer already was mentioning > an upcoming 3.0 release. My, my. Tell you something, Paragon. Call > me when you decided if Nisus is to be a MS-Word-class word processor > or a super-duper programming editor with word processing capabilities. > If the fact that the program resaves TEXT with a different creator and kills the resource fork is so '<<effeely>> unusuable' then do tell what you use for a word processor?? Since all of the major WP's for the Mac all have this deficiency (and I do agree that it is one!), then I guess you don't use any of them, eh??? (Oh, version 2.0 has the same problem, and I can't comment on version 3.0 at this time...) As to your question about where Paragon sees Nisus in relation to MSWord, that's a good question. My understanding is that they want to go head to head against MS, and are doing it in their own way. In many ways they have made inroads into the Mac WP market by offering a set of WP Tools that were not available anywhere else (eg. GREP) and now they are working on coming back with the tools that maybe they should have offered in the first place (ie. footnotes/endnotes, outlining, etc.). If you want to use Nisus as a WP, then use it as such, it you want to use it as a 'super-duper pgramming editor, etc.' then go ahead. I tend to use it for both depending on the task at hand, and since it is the only product out there I can use as such, that is another STAR in it's corner... > I could use the latter provided that you you fixed some of the stupid > deficiencies that are present in the 1.0 ("jump to beg/ end of doc, > next/previous paragraph | sentence | word executed in the form of > interpreted macros & not listening to command/ shift/ option arrow > keys". Real sloooow; I could laugh a night away if I wasn't so > pissed off with the result. Other examples of such non-quite-well- > designed features too numerous to mention but available on request) > According to the 'Nisus Quick Reference' card sitting next to my Mac (I keep it there for GREP reference), there are indeed way to do all the movement that you requested (jump to beg/end of doc, etc.) from the keyboard which have been in since v1.0. I would suggest that you read the first page of the Quick Reference card for more information, for that matter, read the docs, you might learn a thing or two! As to the speed of the Macro Language, I agree that it is far from fast (and far from perfect by any stretch of the imagination), but remember that it is the ONLY WP with a builtin Macro language, and there are LOTS of places they can go from here with it. I am glad it's there, as it has come in handy on many occasions to do things that could not have gotten done otherwise (or at least not without a LOT of work!) (I will agree with you that there are a number of 'not-quite-well- designed features though...) > That is, call me if you're reading this, which I doubt in the first > place.... so much for the (implied) product support where it really > counts.... which should be right here, on usenet, and _not_ primarily > available only by telephone within the geographics limits of US of A. > Geography and user-support don't mix! > That is such a wonderful idea, but since not EVERYONE in the world can get, or wants to get an account on a machine with USENET/Internet connectivety, you can not hold ANY vender accountable for not being here online to support you. More and more companies are slowly beginning to find the benefits of doing online support, and it's getting better... >-- >---- You just survived another load of gross exaggerations from >------- Ian Feldman, the ASCII hacker / "I work to live, not the and if I never have to survive another load, it will be too soon! <grin> -- +--------------------------------------------------+ Leonard Rosenthol | GEnie : MACgician Lazerware, inc. | MacNet: MACgician UUCP: svc@well.UUCP | ALink : D0025
ianf@nada.kth.se (Ian Feldman) (09/22/89)
In article <13725@well.UUCP> svc@well.UUCP (Leonard Rosenthol) writes: > If the fact that the program resaves TEXT with a different creator >and kills the resource fork is so '<<effeely>> unusuable' then do tell >what you use for a word processor?? Since all of the major WP's for the Mac >all have this deficiency (and I do agree that it is one!), then I guess you >don't use any of them, eh??? Right you are, I don't use any of the existing WP:s save for an occassional post-edit in WriteNow 2.0 or Word 3.0.1. Originally I used *only and exclusively* the word-processor inside the MS Works, which I find a fairly good job as far as simple writing tools go... and it ain't that simple (ie, primitive) either. However, for serious writing-cum-programming and editing of downloaded text-files (of which I have plenty) I exclusively use the McSink/ Vantage text processing DA. I found that both your own Sigma-Edit and a french product "Joli Write" would give me similar functions (though McSink has more of it incl. a limited macro-language). Simply put I distinguish between the text creation/ writing stage (when I wouldn't play with multiple fonts and sizes anyway) and the editing/ formatting stage during which I might add some formatting commands that are not available from within McSink (that, being a "text", not "word", processor is limited to one font & size per window, although it can handle 16 open windows simulta- neuosly). Apart from a nice set of built-in programming-related functions it is also *very fast*, especially when jumping in steps, works nicely without a mouse and coexists happily with other appli- cations. It's not perfect but then, neither am I... ;-) > As to your question about where Paragon sees Nisus in relation to >MSWord, that's a good question. Obviously, they are trying to go after both the MSWORD-market and to provide the programmer community with a successor to the QUED. The will was there, allright, although the execution leaves a lot to desire. I must admit that Nisus is admirably inspiring in some parts (the DFLT resource in every doc; configurability of user interface, even the non-standard option-scrolling (=instantenous reverse-direction scrolling)) and, clearly, with a lot of oomph. In most other respects however, mainly due to its slow jumping and menu-decoding speed, it is a disaster. > According to the 'Nisus Quick Reference' card sitting next to my >Mac (I keep it there for GREP reference), there are indeed way to do all the >movement that you requested (jump to beg/end of doc, etc.) from the keyboard Jump to beg/ end of doc keybord-shortcuts merely call the interpre- ted macro functions. This is *progress*? > As to the speed of the Macro Language, I agree that it is far from >fast (and far from perfect by any stretch of the imagination), but remember >that it is the ONLY WP with a builtin Macro language Oh, I don't mind the macro-language being slow - it is always faster than hand-keyed-process alternatives. I merely object to having strictly *primary* jumping functions implemented as macros instead of being hard-coded (which is NOT the same thing as being hard-wired to a particular (command-)<key>) > (I will agree with you that there are a number of 'not-quite-well- >designed features though...) > product support where it really >> counts.... which should be right here, on usenet, and _not_ primarily >> available only by telephone within the geographics limits of US of A. >> Geography and user-support don't mix! >> > That is such a wonderful idea, but since not EVERYONE in the world can >get, or wants to get an account on a machine with USENET/Internet True, but, aren't we here the *CUTTING EDGE* of the _global_ Macintosh community? If not us, then who? If not here then where? Paragon, if they are serious, should at least care about being visible here, question of support notwithstanding. So, it looks like it is TXXT next for me... -- ---- ------ ianf@nada.kth.se/ @sekth.bitnet/ uunet!nada.kth.se!ianf ---- --