rjf@canon.co.uk (Robin Faichney) (03/23/91)
I'm familiar with using vi+troff under UNIX for reports and so forth, but I'm about to embark on writing a book on a PC, and I know nothing about either PCs or wordprocessing other than vi+troff. I've heard that many of the well known WPs are not really suitable for books -- they are not designed to cope with the size, for one thing. Also, I don't really want to pay for facilities like graphics-handling which I'll never use. Can anyone recommend a suitable WP for me? I've heard that LaTex is available for PCs, and I'm sure it's good for books. Can anyone tell me more? Email and I'll post a summary if there's interest. Thanks alot. -- Robin Faichney (this is not a signature)
louis@cs.athabascau.ca (Louis Schmittroth) (03/26/91)
In article <1991Mar23.145145.23613@canon.co.uk>, rjf@canon.co.uk (Robin Faichney) writes: > I'm familiar with using vi+troff under UNIX for reports and so forth, > but I'm about to embark on writing a book on a PC, and I know nothing > about either PCs or wordprocessing other than vi+troff. I suggest you look at getting the MKS version of vi for MS/DOS, and getting the EROFF desktop typesetting package from Elan Software. Call Elan at 415-322-2450, or write: Elan Computer Group, 410 CAmbridge Ave Suite A, Palo Alto, CA 94306. EROFF runs on UNIXes and MS/DOS. It is an excellent implementation of troff with support for both Postscript and HP LaserJets. I use this all the time on Xenix. MKS: 35 King Street North, Waterloo, ON, Canada N2J 2W9. To order call 1-800-265-2797 or 1-519-884-2251
steved@hrshcx.csd.harris.com (Steve Daukas) (03/29/91)
In article <1571@aupair.cs.athabascau.ca>, louis@cs.athabascau.ca (Louis Schmittroth) writes: >In article <1991Mar23.145145.23613@canon.co.uk>, rjf@canon.co.uk (Robin Faichney) writes: >> I'm familiar with using vi+troff under UNIX for reports and so forth, >> but I'm about to embark on writing a book on a PC, and I know nothing >> about either PCs or wordprocessing other than vi+troff. > > I suggest you look at getting the MKS version of vi for MS/DOS, and > getting the EROFF desktop typesetting package from Elan Software. Call I am not in my home office, so I can't give exact information - BUT I believe there are much less expensive alternatives to MKS, especially if you are interested in more than Vi! Last I looked, the version of MKS with Vi, awk, et. al. was only a few hundred dollars less than AT&T's unix for intel (something like $600, but I'll have to check). Those that use MKS usually use alot of DOS as well as things like Windows et. al.. If you don't know DOS, you probably can use something else. There have been discussions in the PC news groups about Vi editors for DOS, many of them shareware. Try looking in the comp subgroups related to PCs and DOS. If you are looking for a quasi DOS/Unix interface to preserve what you are use to now, I feel MKS is far too expensive. There are options ranging from buying Unix to buying Unix knock-offs like Coherent ($99). I have Coherent. It has both Vi and MicroEmacs, as well as roff, awk, et. al.. It also runs rn, cnews, and smail that comes from third party (read free) sources - usually those who wanted the utility and wrote it themselves (much like how Unix started). I got Coherent because I wanted to have a similar technical environment to that of work. I also use DOS for the wealth of applications available. This leads me to another point, namely your book. My father-in-law is currently on his second book (pharmacology texts). He is using TeX because publishers readily accept it and it is a true typseting language (its also free). He looked at roff and concluded that it was too primitive and would be very difficult to do what he needed. Besides TeX, there are many other packages that produce postscript, dvi files, etc... He simply asked the publishers what they would prefer... Another reference to the useability of roff was in the preface of a Unix text. The authors comments basically said that it was far too difficult to get troff to do what they needed and what the publisher wanted. They concluded with the following statement: "we have concluded that there must be a better way." This is paraphrased (I'm not in my office at home, so I can't find the text), but I will provide the actual reference if you desire. My feelings, based on my father-in-law, and others I have helped set-up systems, is that you might want to look at other solutions before deciding. The best thing to do is to talk with those who write on their own systems (e.g., local independent writers, newspaper contributors, others who did what you want to do). I havn't looked, but I'd guess there are a few news groups chock full of literary types that could help in this area. Also, you could talk to those in your company that write the manuals and marcom materials et. al.. I noticed the followup to comp.text, good idea :-) I don't read that group, so if you want to reply, you could post to comp.windows.ms as your original question was posted, or send along some E-mail. Steve -- .-------------------..---------------------------. | Stephen C. Daukas || sdaukas@csd.harris.com | | (617) 221-1834 || uunet!travis!misg!sdaukas | `-------------------'`---------------------------'
rstevens@noao.edu (Rich Stevens) (03/29/91)
> This leads me to another point, namely your book. My father-in-law is > currently on his second book (pharmacology texts). He is using TeX because > publishers readily accept it and it is a true typseting language (its also > free). Two points. First, publishers these days just want camera-ready copy that meets their design specs. Two I'm familiar with (Prentice Hall and Addison Wesley) could care less what software you produce it with. The actual typesetting houses that produce the camera-ready copy (for those of us without our own typesetters in-house) can take PostScript, regardless how it was produced. Second, 95% of troff is now free, with GNU's groff. All that's missing are grap and the latest page making software from DWB 3.1. > Another reference to the useability of roff was in the preface of a Unix > text. The authors comments basically said that it was far too difficult > to get troff to do what they needed and what the publisher wanted. They > concluded with the following statement: "we have concluded that there > must be a better way." This sounds like the next-to-last paragraph in the Preface of the BSD daemon book. Another relevant quote is from Brian Kernighan's report "A Typesetter- independent TROFF" (Bell Labs CSTR 97, 1981): "My first thought (a thought shared by many others) was that this would be a glorious opportunity to replace TROFF with a new formatting language: better designed, easier to work with, and of course much faster. This remains a desireable goal, but, after quite a bit of thought spread over several years, I am still not really much closer to a better design, let alone an implementation. > The best thing to do is to talk with those who write on their own systems > (e.g., local independent writers, newspaper contributors, others who did > what you want to do). Just be aware that producing a large book is quite different from producing newspaper articles or marketing brochures. Rich Stevens (rstevens@noao.edu)
rodgers@clausius.mmwb.ucsf.edu (03/30/91)
In <1571@aupair.cs.athabascau.ca> louis@cs.athabascau.ca (Louis Schmittroth) writes: >In article <1991Mar23.145145.23613@canon.co.uk>, rjf@canon.co.uk (Robin Faichney) writes: >> I'm familiar with using vi+troff under UNIX for reports and so forth, >> but I'm about to embark on writing a book on a PC, and I know nothing >> about either PCs or wordprocessing other than vi+troff. >I suggest you look at getting the MKS version of vi for MS/DOS, and >getting the EROFF desktop typesetting package from Elan Software. There is also an excellent version of troff suitable for book production available from SoftQuad (416)963-8337; or, if you already have source licenses for Adobe TranScript and ditroff, get UCSF Enhanced troff/TranScript from the Office of Technol. Licensing in Berkeley (415)643-7201). Cheerio, Rick Rodgers R. P. C. Rodgers, M.D. (415)476-2957 (work) 664-0560 (home) UCSF Laurel Heights Campus UUCP: ...ucbvax.berkeley.edu!cca.ucsf.edu!rodgers 3333 California St., Suite 102 Internet: rodgers@maxwell.mmwb.ucsf.edu San Francisco CA 94118 USA BITNET: rodgers@ucsfcca
jaap@mtxinu.COM (Jaap Akkerhuis) (03/30/91)
In article <1048@hrshcx.csd.harris.com> steved@hrshcx.csd.harris.com (Steve Daukas) writes: > [among other things] > > Another reference to the useability of roff was in the preface of a Unix > text. The authors comments basically said that it was far too difficult > to get troff to do what they needed and what the publisher wanted. They > concluded with the following statement: "we have concluded that there > must be a better way." This is paraphrased (I'm not in my office at home, so > I can't find the text), but I will provide the actual reference if you desire. > This remark is the 4.3BSD book by Leffler at all. and is citated completely out of context. It refers to the fact that bottoming out the pages wasn't easy and had to be done by hand. Implementing the design wasn't too bad. Since I was instrumental in getting the book on the shelves, I can assure you that producing the book (with the same design) using TeX, Scribe, Frame, Word, Interleaf etc. would have been just as complicated or likely even more complicated (and in some systems impossible), due to some of the details in the specs. The bottom line here is that when there is a design which has features different then the design as build in the typesetting programs, one has to do a lot of work to adapt the programs/macros. jaap
jlo@elan.Elan.COM (Jeff Lo) (03/30/91)
In article <1571@aupair.cs.athabascau.ca> louis@cs.athabascau.ca (Louis Schmittroth) writes: >I suggest you look at getting the MKS version of vi for MS/DOS, and >getting the EROFF desktop typesetting package from Elan Software. Call >Elan at 415-322-2450, or write: Elan Computer Group, 410 CAmbridge Ave >Suite A, Palo Alto, CA 94306. > >EROFF runs on UNIXes and MS/DOS. It is an excellent implementation of >troff with support for both Postscript and HP LaserJets. I use this >all the time on Xenix. We moved quite some time ago (over two years) into larger quarters. Our current address and phone number are: Elan Computer Group, Inc. 888 Villa Street, Third Floor Mountain View, CA 94041 (415) 964-2200 FAX: (415) 964-8588 We are currently on release 3.0 of Eroff and release 1.1 of our WYSIWYG publishing product, Avalon Publisher. -- Jeff Lo - PP-ASEL & Amateur Triumph (TR6) Mechanic Elan Computer Group, Inc. jlo@elan.com, ..!{ames,uunet}!elan!jlo 888 Villa Street, Third Floor, Mountain View, CA 94041, 415-964-2200