krazy@claris.com (Jeff Erickson) (05/02/89)
I must have missed the original post. Time to defend the MWII spell checker. From article <13120@paris.ics.uci.edu>, by milne@ics.uci.edu (Alastair Milne): > The spelling checker built into WriteNow version 1 does all but the last 2 > of these things (I haven't tried version 2 yet): WriteNow 2.0 has the same spelling checker interface as 1.0, but I think it may be a bit faster. >>Speed: Nobody wants to wait around while the speller is doing its thing. > If you were using a Z80 machine before, you'd like the speed in WriteNow. > And it's faster than Word 3.02's, too. MWII is fast, too. Word is like waiting to the pyramids to crumble, in my, uh, humble opinion. More details on this later. >>Context Display: seeing the word in its context. > WriteNow video-inverts the word right in the document -- though to be > fair I believe this is standard practise for built-in checkers. Ditto. In addition, there is a 'context box' which can be called up at the bottom of the dialog. The misspelled word shows up underlined in the middle of one line of text. Since the dialog is movable (as is WriteNow's), you can look to see exactly where the word is, anyway. >>Easy lookup for suggested replacement: (i.e., not just one >> choice but several words in the immediate vicinity) > WriteNow's checker window provides a GUESS button. Clicking it causes > all the similar words it can find to appear AS BUTTONS themselves. > Just click the word you want. Or click FORGET. Or IGNORE. MWII doesn't wait for you to click on a button. I looks up similar words in the background. The process is interruptible, so if you know the word is right, you can immediately click on "Learn" or "Skip" and the lookup will be aborted. The suggestion list WriteNow gives you is a series of buttons. MacWrite II gives you a scrolling list (like in the Open/Save dialogs) and a text-edit field. You can type in the correct spelling, double-click on the correct suggestion (the first click copies the suggestion to the edit box), or use the keyboard (command-1 for the first suggestion, command-2 for the second, and so on up to the sixth). >>Ease in adding word to main dictionary: Yes, it used to be >> fairly easy to add to the main dictionary rather than >> creating alternate dictionaries. > Click the LEARN button in the checker's window. I've found this a very > quick way to add plurals and possessives to the dictionary. Hmmm. We don't do this one. You actually have to install a user dictionary (simple enough -- invoke the "Install Dictionaries" command, and click "New"), but the installation can be made automatic (instructions in the manual). There's a "Learn" button in MWII's spell checker dialog, also. It adds the word to the current user dictionary. Also, our checker is smart enough to detect plurals and possessives. >>Ability to mark words found by speller to locate them >> in an editor: sometimes faster. > Well, it doesn't attach anything to the word that would help you find it > later -- but since it's work directly in the document anyway, and has in > fact already found the location -- do you really need this? The checker > is a modeless dialogue, so you can alternate between it and the document > with no difficulty. Once again, ditto. The misspelled word is highlit right there in the text; no need to go back and find it later. One minor quibble. While I find our spelling checker much better at most things than WriteNow's, one property annoys me: our dialog is not modeless, but merely movable. You have to hit "Cancel" to get back to the document. I think this is due to a difference in design strategy: we spell-check the entire document when you bring up the dialog, and then run through the list of misspellings interactively; whereas, WriteNow find the next misspelled word after the current insertion point/selection. So in order to go back and forth between the dialog and the document, you have to close the dialog and bring it up again (rebuilding the list of misspelled words in the process). This difference in philosophy also affects the speed. WriteNow is faster at finding the FIRST misspelled word, but MWII is *much* faster at "finding" the second one. >>Ability to back up: Sometimes you change your mind on how to >>spell something, such as a transliterated name (Qaddafi, Kadaffi, >>Qadhafi--intifada, intifadah) or a word with more than one correct >>spelling (modeling, modelling). > Since WriteNow's checker always advances from the current cursor > position, and the dialogue is modeless, you only need to move up to > the top (or in fact to anywhere you want) and click in the text. > The check will continue from there. > > Your only problem here is that if you've told it to ignore Qaddafi > (because you consider it correct, but don't actually want it in the main > dictionary) it will continue to ignore it, rather than landing on it for > changes. See the previous discussion about modelessness. MWII doesn't remember which sections of the text have been checked (as WriteNow does), so you don't have the problem of the checker ignoring ytour word when it shouldn't. I should point out one other feature we have that WriteNow doesn't. When you find a misspelled word and offer a replacement, we replace ALL instances of that misspelled word. So if you changed your mind about "Qadaffi", you could change every instance of it in one swell foop. It would be nice if you could turn this feature off (grrr...), but you can't. Yet. (Of course, you can do that with Find/Change, too, in both programs.) >>...locate repeated words, such as "the the," which is more >>of a typo than a grammatical error. > > Nice. This I haven't seen. I have, and it's nice. Unfortunately, we don't do it, either. >>Now put all this into a desk accessory, make it dirt-cheap, >>and you'll have something. > > Try Thunder. My brother, on a 6-year old Mac 512+, swears by it. ---- A few other selling points about MWII's spelling checker: # It can check just a selected range of text, the whole main body, or the whole document (headers, footers, and footnotes included). # It can spellcheck as you type. Personally, I find this incredibly annoying, but you can have the program beep at you, or just flash the menu bar, every time you type a misspelled word. A menu command (with a keyboard equivalent, Thank God!), lets you check that word immediately. # Within the spelling dialog, you can type any word (in the edit box) and check its spelling, get suggestions, etc. # We have (or will have soon) dictionaries in about ten foreign languages (British, Spanish, French, German, Swedish, Danish, Portuguese, Norwegian,.....) You'll have to call our customer service dept. for details about this. # If you know the secret password, it can automatically reroute every electronic financial transaction in the country into your own Swiss bank account for exactly one second. This gives the average user about $350M if invoked at three in the morning. It's simple, it's untraceable, and best of all, it's TAX-FREE!!! (No, I'm not going to tell you the password! Are you kidding?!) Before I started working for Claris, I was an avid fan of WriteNow, and there are still some things about it that I like better than MWII. Fortunately, I'm in a position to suggest that those things get changed! :-) Well, I gotta go. Some nice men from the Government are here to talk to me. -- Jeff Erickson Claris Corporation | Birdie, birdie, in the sky, 408/987-7309 Applelink: Erickson4 | Why'd you do that in my eye? krazy@claris.com ames!claris!krazy | I won't fret, and I won't cry. "I'm a heppy, heppy ket!" | I'm just glad that cows don't fly.
steve@violet.berkeley.edu (Steve Goldfield) (05/02/89)
In article <9997@claris.com> krazy@claris.com (Jeff Erickson) writes:
#>I must have missed the original post. Time to defend the MWII spell checker.
And I must have missed previous responses to my post, which
wasn't the original one but probably second. First, a
clarification, I mainly use WriteNow 2.0 and don't have
recent versions of MacWrite, mostly because we can't find
our original program disk to get it updated.
#>From article <13120@paris.ics.uci.edu>, by milne@ics.uci.edu (Alastair Milne):
#>> The spelling checker built into WriteNow version 1 does all but the last 2
#>> of these things (I haven't tried version 2 yet):
#>
#>WriteNow 2.0 has the same spelling checker interface as 1.0, but I think it
#>may be a bit faster.
#>
#>>>Speed: Nobody wants to wait around while the speller is doing its thing.
#>> If you were using a Z80 machine before, you'd like the speed in WriteNow.
#>> And it's faster than Word 3.02's, too.
What I was really saying is that, aside from its initial pass, I
could spell check a document quicker on my Kaypro II than I do
on my Mac II, not because of the electronics but because of the
design of the software.
#>MWII is fast, too. Word is like waiting to the pyramids to crumble, in my, uh,
#>humble opinion.
#>
#>More details on this later.
#>
#>>>Context Display: seeing the word in its context.
#>> WriteNow video-inverts the word right in the document -- though to be
#>> fair I believe this is standard practise for built-in checkers.
#>
#>Ditto. In addition, there is a 'context box' which can be called up at
#>the bottom of the dialog. The misspelled word shows up underlined in the
#>middle of one line of text. Since the dialog is movable (as is WriteNow's),
#>you can look to see exactly where the word is, anyway.
Perhaps it's because I'm not a mouse-lover when I'm in a word
processing program, but I found my old CP/M spelling checker
superior because I could get it to implement all my choices
by typing a single character without removing my hands from
the keyboard. The number of choices isn't so great that one
needs a mouse, and if you have to type in a replacement
spelling you don't have to reposition your hands. The point
is that when you are in a spelling mode/program, you want
to get through it and out of it as quickly as possible.
#>>>Easy lookup for suggested replacement: (i.e., not just one
#>>> choice but several words in the immediate vicinity)
#>> WriteNow's checker window provides a GUESS button. Clicking it causes
#>> all the similar words it can find to appear AS BUTTONS themselves.
#>> Just click the word you want. Or click FORGET. Or IGNORE.
#>
#>MWII doesn't wait for you to click on a button. I looks up similar words in
#>the background. The process is interruptible, so if you know the word is
#>right, you can immediately click on "Learn" or "Skip" and the lookup will be
#>aborted.
#>
#>The suggestion list WriteNow gives you is a series of buttons. MacWrite II
#>gives you a scrolling list (like in the Open/Save dialogs) and a text-edit
#>field. You can type in the correct spelling, double-click on the correct
#>suggestion (the first click copies the suggestion to the edit box), or use
#>the keyboard (command-1 for the first suggestion, command-2 for the second,
#>and so on up to the sixth).
That's more like what I'd like to have except that I'd like to be
able to type numbers or letters to implement my choices than to
have to click the squeaky mouse. I usually like the mouse when I'm
drawing or desktop publishing, but in general I find that it is
overused in some Mac software.
#>>>Ease in adding word to main dictionary: Yes, it used to be
#>>> fairly easy to add to the main dictionary rather than
#>>> creating alternate dictionaries.
#>> Click the LEARN button in the checker's window. I've found this a very
#>> quick way to add plurals and possessives to the dictionary.
#>
#>Hmmm. We don't do this one. You actually have to install a user dictionary
#>(simple enough -- invoke the "Install Dictionaries" command, and click "New"),
#>but the installation can be made automatic (instructions in the manual).
#>
#>There's a "Learn" button in MWII's spell checker dialog, also. It adds the
#>word to the current user dictionary.
#>
#>Also, our checker is smart enough to detect plurals and possessives.
#>
#>>>Ability to mark words found by speller to locate them
#>>> in an editor: sometimes faster.
#>> Well, it doesn't attach anything to the word that would help you find it
#>> later -- but since it's work directly in the document anyway, and has in
#>> fact already found the location -- do you really need this? The checker
#>> is a modeless dialogue, so you can alternate between it and the document
#>> with no difficulty.
I've found it very cumbersome to alternate back and forth between
the speller box and the text: too many keys to type or mouse
clicks.
#>Once again, ditto. The misspelled word is highlit right there in the text;
#>no need to go back and find it later.
#>
#>One minor quibble. While I find our spelling checker much better at most
#>things than WriteNow's, one property annoys me: our dialog is not modeless,
#>but merely movable. You have to hit "Cancel" to get back to the document.
#>I think this is due to a difference in design strategy: we spell-check the
#>entire document when you bring up the dialog, and then run through the list
#>of misspellings interactively; whereas, WriteNow find the next misspelled
#>word after the current insertion point/selection.
#>
#>So in order to go back and forth between the dialog and the document, you
#>have to close the dialog and bring it up again (rebuilding the list of
#>misspelled words in the process).
#>
#>This difference in philosophy also affects the speed. WriteNow is faster at
#>finding the FIRST misspelled word, but MWII is *much* faster at "finding" the
#>second one.
#>
#>>>Ability to back up: Sometimes you change your mind on how to
#>>>spell something, such as a transliterated name (Qaddafi, Kadaffi,
#>>>Qadhafi--intifada, intifadah) or a word with more than one correct
#>>>spelling (modeling, modelling).
#>> Since WriteNow's checker always advances from the current cursor
#>> position, and the dialogue is modeless, you only need to move up to
#>> the top (or in fact to anywhere you want) and click in the text.
#>> The check will continue from there.
#>>
#>> Your only problem here is that if you've told it to ignore Qaddafi
#>> (because you consider it correct, but don't actually want it in the main
#>> dictionary) it will continue to ignore it, rather than landing on it for
#>> changes.
#>
#>See the previous discussion about modelessness. MWII doesn't remember which
#>sections of the text have been checked (as WriteNow does), so you don't have
#>the problem of the checker ignoring ytour word when it shouldn't.
The key point the respondents have missed is that there are
usually ways to do what my CP/M spell checker did. But whereas
it performed these acts quickly, usually by typing a single
character, all the Mac programs I've used require a sequence
of several operations, either with control-character or mouse
clicks or both. The fact that a task can be accomplished isn't
saying much if the user has to do three or four times as many
operations to get it done. Perhaps this is because my old spell
checker was dedicated; all you could do was spell check when
you were in it. As a result, it knew that the possible operations
it might have to carry out were quite limited and did them with
very simple commands and very efficiently. Because WriteNow,
and presumably MW II, too, are also preserving the option of
doing many other tasks at any time at the whim of the user,
the task of spell checking has become more onerous. That's
why I suggested putting an optimal spell checker in a desk
accessory, though it could also be integrated into a word
processor. The advantage of a desk accessory is that it
could be used with any word processing program instead
of having a different speller for each program one uses;
I have three for example.
#>I should point out one other feature we have that WriteNow doesn't. When
#>you find a misspelled word and offer a replacement, we replace ALL instances
#>of that misspelled word. So if you changed your mind about "Qadaffi", you
#>could change every instance of it in one swell foop.
#>
#>It would be nice if you could turn this feature off (grrr...), but you can't.
#>Yet.
#>
#>(Of course, you can do that with Find/Change, too, in both programs.)
Again, of course you can do it. But not, I assume, by typing a
single character to back up to the previous spell checking site,
previously flagged word, whatever. From your description of how
MW II's checker works, however, I'd assume that it could back
up--since it does an initial global spell check--if it was
desired to add such an option. The difference between us is
that you are talking about features and I am talking about use.
I've found that sometimes it is easier or at least more intuitive
to back up, see what spelling was chosen, think it over, etc. If
I can do that by hitting a single key, I'm more likely to use
it than if I have to go through several operations to get to
the same place.
I guess my main complaint is one I've voiced in this discussion
group at least once before. I'm a programming type who comes to
the Mac from mainframes, CP/M, UNIX, and, fortunately, very short
experience with DOS. Some of the software I use on the Mac, I find
cumbersome to use because when I want to type a simple command
because I know exactly what I want to do, I can't. I maintain
that the gap between the ordinary Mac user interface and the
Mac programming interface is much too broad, that the lowest
common denominator is too low.
It's fine to introduce new users to a very easy-to-use interface,
but what I'd appreciate in most of the software I use, is the
option of using a more advanced means of interaction which
does require that the user remember some commands without
going all the way into a Mac programming environment.
Examples:
In draw programs, I spend much too much time getting lines
to precisely intersect with my mouse. Wouldn't it be great
to be able to click into a command mode in which I instructed
the program to generate such an intersection? (Extend line
A until it just intersects with line B) That's an example
of what I mean by overuse of the mouse.
In word processors, I spend too much time dragging to get
just the text I need. I'd prefer to have an option of
defining a text block with commands rather than the mouse.
Sometimes I have to click the mouse three or four times
to get it exactly where I want it to be, for instance for
an insertion point. I'd like to have an option to go into
a command mode where something like vi commands worked.
These are just a couple of examples. I could spend all
day and into next week dreaming up improvements in the
software I use every day. But I see the root problem
as the underlying design of the Mac interface and it's
rather rigid limitations on what I, as a user, can do.
Steve Goldfieldkrazy@claris.com (Jeff Erickson) (05/03/89)
KEY: ~~~ | Steve Goldfield <steve@violet.berkeley.edu> || Jeff Erickson <krazy@claris.com> ||| Alastair Milne <milne@ics.uci.edu> |||| Steve Goldfield (again) | What I was really saying is that, aside from its initial pass, I | could spell check a document quicker on my Kaypro II than I do | on my Mac II, not because of the electronics but because of the | design of the software. Oh boy.... I hope this doesn't get blown into another mouse versus keyboard flame war. I'm sure I'm going to regret this, but here goes... || [...] Since the dialog is movable (as is WriteNow's), || you can look to see exactly where the word is, anyway. | | Perhaps it's because I'm not a mouse-lover when I'm in a word | processing program, but I found my old CP/M spelling checker | superior because I could get it to implement all my choices | by typing a single character without removing my hands from | the keyboard. The number of choices isn't so great that one | needs a mouse, and if you have to type in a replacement | spelling you don't have to reposition your hands. The point | is that when you are in a spelling mode/program, you want | to get through it and out of it as quickly as possible. True. That's why MWII has the keyboard equivalents for replacements and each of the buttons. You can spellcheck the entire document, make corrections, check other words, use the checker's suggestions (or not), all without taking your hands from the keyboard. The up and down arrows go through the list of suggestions. The return key makes the placement (either the selected suggestion or the contents of the edit field if none is selected). Command-L learns. Command-S skips. Command-C checks the word in the edit field. Command-period cancels. || [description of MWII's dialog box, and the use of cmd-1 through cmd-6 || or duble-clicking to choose suggestions] | | That's more like what I'd like to have except that I'd like to be | able to type numbers or letters to implement my choices than to | have to click the squeaky mouse. I usually like the mouse when I'm | drawing or desktop publishing, but in general I find that it is | overused in some Mac software. Here I disagree. My personal opinion is that if it were possible, every- thing should be doable either from the mouse or the keyboard. The problem is not that the mouse is overused, but the the keyboard is underused, IMHO. |||| Ability to mark words found by speller to locate them |||| in an editor: sometimes faster. [discussion of WriteNow's modeless dialog deleted] | I've found it very cumbersome to alternate back and forth between | the speller box and the text: too many keys to type or mouse | clicks. |||| Ability to back up: Sometimes you change your mind on how to |||| spell something, such as a transliterated name (Qaddafi, Kadaffi, |||| Qadhafi--intifada, intifadah) or a word with more than one correct |||| spelling (modeling, modelling). [more discussion of modelessness deleted] | The key point the respondents have missed is that there are | usually ways to do what my CP/M spell checker did. But whereas | it performed these acts quickly, usually by typing a single | character, all the Mac programs I've used require a sequence | of several operations, either with control-character or mouse | clicks or both. The fact that a task can be accomplished isn't | saying much if the user has to do three or four times as many | operations to get it done. But it isn't three or four times as many operations. You just click once in the right place. You, or someone else, is going to point out that "click once in the right place" involves (1) taking your hands off the keyboard (2) putting it on the mouse (3) positinoing the mouse (4) clicking the mouse button (5) taking your hands off the mouse (6) scratching your nose and (7) putting your hands back on the keyboard. I never notice the steps. You never notice the steps involved in locating the "e" key on your keyboard, either. It's instinct for you. In exactly the same way, the mouse is instinct for me. Admittedly, I had to learn the instinct, just like I had to learn the instinct required to type quickly. | Perhaps this is because my old spell | checker was dedicated; all you could do was spell check when | you were in it. As a result, it knew that the possible operations | it might have to carry out were quite limited and did them with | very simple commands and very efficiently. Because WriteNow, | and presumably MW II, too, are also preserving the option of | doing many other tasks at any time at the whim of the user, | the task of spell checking has become more onerous. That's | why I suggested putting an optimal spell checker in a desk | accessory, though it could also be integrated into a word | processor. The advantage of a desk accessory is that it | could be used with any word processing program instead | of having a different speller for each program one uses; | I have three for example. It is a central tenet of Its Holy Interfaceness that the user should be able to do anything at any point. Modelessness is next to godliness. If you must be modal, make sure the user CANNOT be confused by the different commands. We, the experienced users, have learned to cope with modes. "I'll just check the whole thing, and THEN go back and look at it." The point of modelessness is that you shouldn't HAVE to wait. I want to look at it NOW, fix it NOW, and then go back to the spell checker. Or not. Who knows? Certainly not the developers! :-) There are technical problems associated with a spell checker desk accessory. Somehow, the DA has to access the application's data, which is *N*O*T* going to be stored as straight text. Either that, or it has to fake out the application into putting pieces of the document on the clipboard. Either you lose performance, or the checker has to know so much about the application that it may as well be integrated. Thunder, if I'm not mistaken, is of the fake-out-clipboard variety. Claris has one spelling checker in all its Mac products. Currently, I believe MWII, MacDraw II, and MacProject II all use it, and I think plans have been announced for inclusion into FileMaker II. Same interface, same dictionary files, in fact, the same CODE. || When you find a misspelled word and offer a replacement, we replace ALL || instances of that misspelled word. [...] || (Of course, you can do that with Find/Change, too, in both programs.) | | Again, of course you can do it. But not, I assume, by typing a | single character to back up to the previous spell checking site, | previously flagged word, whatever. From your description of how | MW II's checker works, however, I'd assume that it could back | up--since it does an initial global spell check--if it was | desired to add such an option. Now that you mention it, you're probably right. Hmmm.... | The difference between us is | that you are talking about features and I am talking about use. | I've found that sometimes it is easier or at least more intuitive | to back up, see what spelling was chosen, think it over, etc. If | I can do that by hitting a single key, I'm more likely to use | it than if I have to go through several operations to get to | the same place. I don't see the difference between "features" and "use". I like to think that Claris hasn't fallen prey to the Galloping Featuritis that plagues MicroSoft. (flame > /dev/null) Of course, I don't claim to have an unbiased view. The more I think about it, the more I agree that it would be nice to back up, and the more I realize that it agrees with the Apple H.I.G. Maybe I should talk to people about this. | I guess my main complaint is one I've voiced in this discussion | group at least once before. I'm a programming type who comes to | the Mac from mainframes, CP/M, UNIX, and, fortunately, very short | experience with DOS. Some of the software I use on the Mac, I find | cumbersome to use because when I want to type a simple command | because I know exactly what I want to do, I can't. I maintain | that the gap between the ordinary Mac user interface and the | Mac programming interface is much too broad, that the lowest | common denominator is too low. I'm a programming type who came to the Mac from Apple II's and UNIX. My initial reaction to the Mac was "Jeez! What a toy! How do I program it? What's this mouse thing? What do you mean I *can't* program it? You call theis a computer?" Well, I can program it now, so it's a real computer now. :-) Seriously, though, after a two-year hiatus from the UNIX environment, I find myself instinctively reaching for the mouse when I'm inside emacs. I keep forgetting that there's no such thing as "selecting text". All I want to do is move *this* text *there*. On a Mac, that's click-drag- fanX-click-fanV. In emacs, that's lots of keystrokes to get to the beginning, lots of keystrokes to get to the end, lots of keystrokes to get to the destination, and only a couple keys to do the actual cutting and pasting. Which interface is "more advanced" is based on what you're used to, and nothing else. I refer you to a statement made by the president of DEC to the effect of "Well, yes, UNIX is easy to learn, but if you want to get any real work done, you'll use VMS." In my opinion, this is bullshit in its purest form, but then I grew up on UNIX. I don't think the "lowest common denominator" is too low. If anything, it's too HIGH. The average >U S E R< doesn't know *anything* about computers, and that is the customer that Apple's interface is attempting to reach. Leaving us programmers out in the cold? Well....I do think the interface is still in its childhood. There are certainly things that could be done better. But in practice, the only problems I have are in programming the machine, never in actually USING it. | It's fine to introduce new users to a very easy-to-use interface, | but what I'd appreciate in most of the software I use, is the | option of using a more advanced means of interaction which | does require that the user remember some commands without | going all the way into a Mac programming environment. MicroSoft agrees with you. Word will let you do *ANYTHING* from the keyboard (including pulling down menus). The result is just a mess. | In draw programs, I spend much too much time getting lines | to precisely intersect with my mouse. Wouldn't it be great | to be able to click into a command mode in which I instructed | the program to generate such an intersection? (Extend line | A until it just intersects with line B) That's an example | of what I mean by overuse of the mouse. Go look at Claris CAD. It lets you do exactly that, very easily, and believe it or not, with either the mouse alone or with a combination of mouse and keyboard. | In word processors, I spend too much time dragging to get | just the text I need. I'd prefer to have an option of | defining a text block with commands rather than the mouse. | Sometimes I have to click the mouse three or four times | to get it exactly where I want it to be, for instance for | an insertion point. I'd like to have an option to go into | a command mode where something like vi commands worked. Practice. I hate having to retype the same word five times because I keep hitting the wrong keys, but the more I type, the less that happens. Most word processors have some standard keyboard commands for moving through text and selecting text. (up arrow = previous line; shift- command-right-arrow = select to end of line; and so on.) At least, MWII does. | These are just a couple of examples. I could spend all | day and into next week dreaming up improvements in the | software I use every day. But I see the root problem | as the underlying design of the Mac interface and it's | rather rigid limitations on what I, as a user, can do. That's funny. Apple considers its interface better because it lets the user do MORE. The truth is simply that each interface is better equipped for different tasks, neither more rigidly controlled than the other. Apple's interface is easier to learn, more consistent overall, more aesthetically pleasing, and better for what I use it for than UNIX is. For me. In my opinion. This message has gotten far too long. This argument has been had before, and it will be had again, as long as there are new metaphors and people who don't want to use them. To each their own. Do what thou wilt. -- Jeff Erickson Claris Corporation | Birdie, birdie, in the sky, 408/987-7309 Applelink: Erickson4 | Why'd you do that in my eye? krazy@claris.com ames!claris!krazy | I won't fret, and I won't cry. "I'm a heppy, heppy ket!" | I'm just glad that cows don't fly.
stores@unix.SRI.COM (Matt Mora) (05/04/89)
>I must have missed the original post. Time to defend the MWII spell checker. > >The suggestion list WriteNow gives you is a series of buttons. MacWrite II >gives you a scrolling list (like in the Open/Save dialogs) and a text-edit >field. You can type in the correct spelling, double-click on the correct I like that much better than the button method. I think that the buttons ruin the spell checker in Write now. Spelling coach uses a popup menu with the same command keys. >One minor quibble. While I find our spelling checker much better at most >things than WriteNow's, one property annoys me: our dialog is not modeless, >but merely movable. You have to hit "Cancel" to get back to the document. When you move your dialog box and it happens to cover the growbox on the window Macwrite II forgets to redraw it. OOPS! >>>...locate repeated words, such as "the the," which is more >>>of a typo than a grammatical error. >> >> Nice, this I haven't seen. >I have, and it's nice. Unfortunately, we don't do it, either. Spelling coach does this and its great. It also checks for correct punctuation. >>>Now put all this into a desk accessory, make it dirt-cheap, >>>and you'll have something. >> Spelling coach is a DA. >A few other selling points about MWII's spelling checker: > # It can check just a selected range of text, the whole main > body, or the whole document (headers, footers, and footnotes > included). > > # It can spellcheck as you type. Personally, I find this > incredibly annoying, but you can have the program beep > at you, or just flash the menu bar, every time you type > a misspelled word. A menu command (with a keyboard > equivalent, Thank God!), lets you check that word > immediately. > > # Within the spelling dialog, you can type any word (in the > edit box) and check its spelling, get suggestions, etc. > > # We have (or will have soon) dictionaries in about ten > foreign languages (British, Spanish, French, German, > Swedish, Danish, Portuguese, Norwegian,.....) You'll > have to call our customer service dept. for details > about this. Spelling Coach Does all of this and is a da that works in all applications except for MacWrite II. It also has leagl and Medical dictionaries. Its the only spell checker I use. If I used the spelling checker that came with each application it would take up tremendous amout of disk space. Now macdraw is going to have a spell checker? Whats up! I 'll say that macwrite spell checker has improved a lot, but when the fix from deneba comes for MWII, my disk will be spared another dictionary. Now if I only new how the get the speeler to work on UNIX (tm). :-) P.S. There is a slight problem with your spell Selection. but i will send you a list of all the things that I find to you later. >Jeff Erickson Claris Corporation | Birdie, birdie, in the sky, >408/987-7309 Applelink: Erickson4 | Why'd you do that in my eye? >krazy@claris.com ames!claris!krazy | I won't fret, and I won't cry. > "I'm a heppy, heppy ket!" | I'm just glad that cows don't fly. P.S.S Why don't you binhex the password and... -- ___________________________________________________________ Matthew Mora SRI International stores@unix.sri.com ___________________________________________________________
richard@claris.com (Richard Scorer) (05/08/89)
In article <30264@sri-unix.SRI.COM> stores@unix.sri.com (Matt Mora) writes:
]the spelling checker that came with each application it would take up
]tremendous amout of disk space. Now macdraw is going to have a spell checker?
]Whats up! I 'll say that macwrite spell checker has improved a lot, but when
]the fix from deneba comes for MWII, my disk will be spared another dictionary.
]
]Now if I only new how the get the speeler to work on UNIX (tm). :-)
]
Well, every Claris app that has a spell checker uses the exact same
dictionary in your system folder. So, you duplicate nothing to use _our_
spell checker.
Just thought I'd let you know.
--
Richard Scorer * UUCP: {ames,apple,portal,sun,voder}!claris!richard
Claris Corporation * AppleLink: Scorer1 * CompuServe: 74017,344