Title: Which word processing software would you CHOOSE?
Post by: bethalize on May 13, 2001, 09:48:19 am
We know from the last poll that most of us use Microsoft Word at work, ten percent of us use Corel Wordperfect and 2% use Lotus and NOBODY uses anything else. So here's the question. Money no object, you are going to choose your own wordprocessing package. No compatibility worries, just for your own use. What would you CHOOSE to use? Post your reasons underneath if you will - and don't forget to log in!
Results (total votes = 54):
Results (total votes = 54):
| Microsoft Word - it's all I know | 12 / 22.2% |  |
| Microsoft Word - I know it's the best | 26 / 48.1% | |
| Corel WordPerfect - it's all I know | 0 / 0.0% | |
| Corel WordPerfect - it's the best (oh! those revealed codes!) | 15 / 27.8% | |
| Something else entirely (are you marginalising me?) | 1 / 1.9% | |
Title: Re: Which word processing software would you CHOOSE?
Post by: bethalize on May 14, 2001, 08:55:09 am
Oh, C'mon! You can't just vote for "something else" and not tell me! Which one of you Lotus users was it? Or - GASP! - is there someone out there who STILL prefers WordStar?
Title: Re: Which word processing software would you CHOOSE?
Post by: radaro on May 14, 2001, 10:08:27 am
I'm not the other, I'm the WordPerfect vote. Still the far superior wordprocessing software of the two. If Novell hadn't neglected it for years, chance are it wouldn't be a Word world.
Title: Re: Which word processing software would you CHOOSE?
Post by: chris68 on May 14, 2001, 10:48:25 am
I'm the Microsoft Word-I know it Best vote. I started out using WordPerfect and hated every minute of it. It's what I used in College along with MultiMate. If only they had Word then.
Chris68
Chris68
Title: You Don't Use Software Just for Self
Post by: kkosmoski on May 14, 2001, 11:47:11 am
We all need to share documents with others, and Word seems to be what most people have on their PC's. I cut my computer teeth on WordPerfect. It used to be fun to make macro's - I had tons of them. Then WP decided to get more fancy schmancy and made macros majorly complicated - it is so tough to fix any little macro mistakes, you may as well start over. They also overcomplicated the graphics (box drawing) part of the program. I also loved Reveal Codes, but the rest of WP grew much less user friendly than I though necessary. I guess I'll have to vote for Word.
Title: But we're playing "let's pretend" here.
Post by: bethalize on May 14, 2001, 05:24:01 pm
I put the bit about not having any compatibility worries in so we could see who actually likes Word, rather than just uses it because everyone else does.
I was expexting lots more of people to jump in and start voting for WP. Still a significant percentage thought.
Doesn't anyone around here like Claris Works? I have a real soft spot for it.
I was expexting lots more of people to jump in and start voting for WP. Still a significant percentage thought.
Doesn't anyone around here like Claris Works? I have a real soft spot for it.
Title: Wordprocessing...
Post by: daisylee on May 15, 2001, 03:40:11 pm
I learned on WordPerfect, and still miss the reveal codes, got to be pretty proficient at Word, and now use Lotus...and although I like Word the best, I'm delighted to have anything after having to use just a typewriter for years! Don't know how we survived without the ability to type, save, archive, retrieve, edit, print...and re-use. What a Godsend, no matter which you use!
Daisylee (singing the praises of word processing!)
Daisylee (singing the praises of word processing!)
Title: Word Processing
Post by: solargal on July 10, 2001, 11:19:49 am
I prefer WordPerfect, however there was an article in the paper on Sunday that said that Word was going to the reveal code format. Don't know exactly how that would work, but anything has got to be easier when you have reveals codes out in front of you. A lot of my trouble with Word is after someone else has created a document and I have to go in and revise it then I really have a problem with indents, numbering, and margins.