Is there any wordprocessor in unix

[Greg A. Woods]

[ It's 08:00, and I haven't had a shower yet! ]

In article <485 at moegate.UUCP> soley at moegate.UUCP (Norman Soley) writes:
> In article <1989Jul17.211715.6273 at eci386.uucp>, I wrote:
> > In article <1111 at jolnet.ORPK.IL.US> gaggy at jolnet.UUCP (Gregory Gulik) writes:
> > > 
> > > WP:	EXPENSIVE!  Yes, maybe a company CAN afford to buy it for
> > 
> > How true.  $3,500.00CDN for WP for an NCR Tower 32/600.  
> 
> What? you must be talking to the wrong people, I paid just under $2,000 for
> exactly this almost a year ago, prices have been coming down fast too.

That's a 32 user lisence.  And as far as Canada goes, there was only
one distributor.  (And, for that matter, I don't know what we paid
for it.  That's after markup, which might be ~30% in this case.)  Some
prices have been dropping, but a lot of software has been getting more
expensive.

> > I don't know why a simple full screen editor is not a
> > standard part of Unix yet.  Perhaps it should even have Wordstar
> > key-bindings as the default, with Emacs as an option.
> 
> repulsive as this sounds (even to me) what they really want is SPF. I've talked 
> to CTC (the people who make SPF-PC) and they just aren't interested in the idea.

How hard would it be to _write_ a custom version?

> Now considering that I can't even get users to spend the 1/2 hour necessary to 
> pick up the basics of vi

If you had a "micro" emacs, or some other "designed for unix" editor,
[I still won't advocate training them with vi] and a way to send all
your users on a good training course, they'd be more than happy, and
would not need any over-blown word-processor for entering and editing
text.

> guess what happens if I tell them that they're going
> to have to learn to use nroff, when something they know and like is available
> from WordPerfect, for a few hundered bucks. I'd be run out of town that's what.

Have you tried?  Have you showed them a simple business letter, or a
memorandum, and it's input text? ...with explanation?

> nroff is a great tool but face it, it's designed for producing technical reports
> not memos and letters. I would no more recommend that a business use nroff for
> that kind of work than Lotus Manuscript. 

It works just as well, no matter the size or complexity of the job.
In fact, for simple jobs, it is _extremely_ easy to use.  Most of the
formatting for a memo is fill-in-the-blanks, and automatic.  Most
simple work can even be done with raw troff/TeX with the same, or
less, number of directives (it's just that the style will then vary as
much as it does for WP users).

> > I've also seen the objection against *roff because of the ease of
> > hiring people already trained with WP.  Why not re-train them.
> 
> OK, my secratary goes on vacation and I hire a temp to replace him. I can just 
> picture the conversation:

I realize you are trying to make a point.  However, I'm trying to
de-bunk a myth.  Have you tried phoning a number of temp. agencies?
If the demand were there, they would have the personel.  If the people
who sell and use Unix wouldn't perpetuate the myths about how hard it
is to use, there'd be a few more user's of troff, and maybe even vi,
and there might even be temp.'s with those skills.  [And yes, that
really is a myth.]

At the same time, I doubt a temp. agency would mind you paying their
rates while you trained one of their people.

> vi and nroff are fine tools for acedemics, technical users and dp professionals
> but I can't imagine anyone trying to use them for production word processing. 
> I also can't imagine trying to use WordPerfect to produce a complex scientific
> paper. 

I know of several organisations using troff/TeX and laser printers for
routine business communications.  I know of many more oranisations
that have in-consistent memo and letter styles because they use
WordPerfect.  I want to know if WP Corp. set their manuals with their
own WP, and if so, how the hell do they achieve the consistency.  I
know of many organisations who don't use troff/TeX, because they don't
know how to make either work for their printer, and can't/won't find
someone who could.
-- 
						Greg A. Woods

woods@{robohack,gate,tmsoft,ontmoh,utgpu,gpu.utcs.Toronto.EDU,utorgpu.BITNET}
+1-416-443-1734 [h]	+1-416-595-5425 [w]	Toronto, Ontario;  CANADA