winstead@faraday.ECE.CMU.EDU (Charles Holden Winstead) (02/15/91)
I write mainly scientific applications and currently use WP5.1 because of the equation editor and its ability to incorporate graphics from other sources, such as postscript, hppl, pcx, etc. The only drawbacks I see are that to run efficiently I have to leave the Windows environment and the fact that it's not a what-you-see-is-what-you-get type of word processor. My question is this - how is Word for Windows for doing equations, how is it for importing graphics, and what is the word on WP for windows - is it a WYSIWYG type of processor and are the features the same as WP5.1? Thanks. Charles Winstead winstead@faraday.ece.cmu.edu Carnegie Mellon
ergo@netcom.COM (Isaac Rabinovitch) (02/17/91)
I think WfW is pretty good with graphics importing. All you need is
the right graphics filter (several come with WfW, and I don't suppose
they're that hard to write). And you can stretch, crop, etc, the
imported graphic.
Incidentally, WfW also has an EQN-like feature called "equation
fields". Don't know how it compares with the WP equivalent.
The *big* trick is figuring out which file formats WfW and your other
application have in common. This usually requires a lot of trial and
error (for example, WfW knows about 1 of the 3 AutoCAD ADI formats,
but nowhere does it say which of the three [binary]), complicated by
the fact that the only way to specify a filter is to change the
graphic file name.
--
ergo@netcom.com Isaac Rabinovitch
netcom!ergo@apple.com Silicon Valley, CA
{apple,amdahl,claris}!netcom!ergo
(specific statement withheld at this time for operational reasons)