Does the .png image format have a text metadata field?

Steve Hayes on Sun, 23 Feb 2020 10:23:09 +0200
typed in alt.windows7.general the following:
On Sat, 22 Feb 2020 19:46:12 -0800, pyotr filipivich
wrote:

"Mayayana" on Sat, 22 Feb 2020 16:31:48
-0500 typed in alt.windows7.general the following:
"pyotr filipivich" wrote
| The short form: I've been using WP for decades, I have a gut
| reaction against the Evil Empire anyway, and Word also wants to
| enhance my computer experience with more freeping dancing bunnies*
| Hope that explains enough.

So you don't necessarily think it's better... you're
just used to it? I've never had occasion to do all
the things you've needed to do, like making a
brochure.

it is as much of a case of I started out just needing to produce
papers for class, getting the home version when I got the home
computer, and over the years found "new" things it could do. I don't
know how one would establish an objective standard of "Word processor
quality".
Notepad and wordpad will handle _most_ people's "word processing"
demands. That is, enter text, edit it, print it out. Whether it is a
memo, letter, or class paper, that's all they really want/need; a
glorified typewriter. All the fonts, formatting, headers, footers and
the rest - for the person who wants to write a letter home, all those
other options are "bloatware".
As I said, I messed about with Gutenberg, and some Desktop
Publishing Software. Gutenberg will handle plain text, you could use
if for letter writing. But it could also "mark up" a document for a
"fancy" result. In 1985, it was pretty cool. It also handled Cyrillic
(and Hebrew) which is why I stumbled across it. I'm trying to figure
out Scribus, because it may do some DTP which I want done. (Mostly,
producing a small booklet of the morning prayers.)

I still use Xywite, a DOS word rocessor that is more powerful than MS
Word, and fits on a 360 floppy disk.

It lacks the bells and whistles that Word has, but as wordprocessors
go, it has more pistons and cylinders.

Again, what are you attempting to do? Send a letter? No need to
get out the printing press, a typewriter will do.


--
pyotr filipivich
Next month's Panel: Graft - Boon or blessing?

knuttle on Sun, 23 Feb 2020 07:15:58
-0500 typed in alt.windows7.general the following:
On 2/23/2020 6:57 AM, mechanic wrote:
On Sun, 23 Feb 2020 10:23:09 +0200, Steve Hayes wrote:

I still use Xywite, a DOS word rocessor that is more powerful than MS
Word, and fits on a 360 floppy disk.

It lacks the bells and whistles that Word has, but as wordprocessors
go, it has more pistons and cylinders.

We all seem to prefer using what we are used to, using a mew tool
takes time and effort. Pity there's no FrameMaker available cheaply
on Windows.

I use WordPerfect. The first word processor I had was a DOS based word
processor on my IBM Jr. I also used in on my first IBM AT. Then for a
short period the company went to MS Word. I used that for years.

I found that MS Word and WordPerfect were both good for the original
document.

However at one time part of my job was to manage a document system.
Editing old MS documents was a pain as traces of formatting form
previous revision collected in the document, until the only solution to
further edit the document was to convert to ASCII, Open it in MS Word
and completely redo the formatting. If WordPerfect the process was
significantly simplified as you could find the offending formatting code
and remove it. This could be done with out going through the ACSII step
and reformatting as in MS Word.

It is the "complex document" vs "I just need to write a letter /
class paper.

Kind of reminds me of why CAD "took off". It wasn't that using
CAD is faster in making the initial drawings, but that it make
revising a drawing "easier" than having to start over.

Consequently today I use WordPerfect because of the ability to purge
problem formatting code with out redoing the complete document. I also
use Quattro Pro.
--
pyotr filipivich
Next month's Panel: Graft - Boon or blessing?

"J. P. Gilliver (John)" on Sun, 23 Feb 2020
11:11:42 +0000 typed in alt.windows7.general the following:
In message , pyotr
filipivich writes:
"Mayayana" on Sat, 22 Feb 2020 16:31:48
-0500 typed in alt.windows7.general the following:
[]
So you don't necessarily think it's better... you're
just used to it?

I think, if we're honest, that's the answer to - or rather reason for -
a lot of these type of argument. (Not just word processors, of course.)
[]
Notepad and wordpad will handle _most_ people's "word processing"
demands. That is, enter text, edit it, print it out. Whether it is a
I actually see very little discussion of Wordpad.
[]
If you typed the report in WordPerfect and you wanted to amend
everything but the Headings to Courier, 11 pt, Fully Justified, you
would press ctrl+home to go to the top of the document and make 3
formatting changes (3 clicks); your entire report (excluding Headings,
which are Styles) would then follow these changes.

If you typed the same report in Word and you wanted to make the same
changes, you would have to do one of the following:

+ Go to Format › Style › Modify › Format › Font (and Paragraph),
then change the Normal (or predefined) Style
+ 'Select All', make these changes, then modify Headings Styles
+ Create a complex search to amend these formatting changes
+ Go through and change each paragraph individually using the
Format Painter

Word's style system _does_ have a "change all 36 examples of this
style?" prompt. (Thanks for mention of Format Painter - so that's what
it's for! I've never used it.)

And see, you've learned something new about your preferred
software.

In many of these cases, we probably have muscle memory of how to do it
in whichever one we're used to.

And that, as much as anything, is the basis for a lot of
complaints: WP v Word. Win-XP vs Windows 7,8,10..N, the new car vs the
old one, etc, etc.

[]
There seems to be, at least on the WP side, a consensus that for
_complex_ documents, where multiple authors have contributed using
their own personal flavor of outline numbering schemes and other style
elements.

(I'm not sure how choice of WP makes any difference the the decision
is whether to have different parts of the document follow different
schemes, or have a consistent one. For the reader, consistent is
probably better; for the authors, all but one - or all - will be a
little unhappy that their style wasn't adopted. Or are you saying that
it's easier to knock them all into one in WP? [Really, if there's going
to be a collaborative big document, you should establish common
standards at a kickoff meeting anyway, though I know no-one likes doing
that; it's rather like a big VHDL or other engineering project, where
establishing interface standards at the start saves tears later.
Like engineering standards, (and computer standards), the nice
thing is there are so many to chose from.
I suspect that what happens is that author A got used to using
outline format "A", while author B uses a different one. Both believe
that they are implementing Corporate Procedure properly, but it is the
administrative assistant's secretary who is tasked with making sure
that the final brief matches not only company standards, but the
standards set by the court where they are filing the brief. Or the
project report conforms ... etc.
I also suspect that that there is a lot of "legacy" standards from
the days of pen and parchment.
--
pyotr filipivich
Next month's Panel: Graft - Boon or blessing?

Ken Blake on Sun, 23 Feb 2020 09:00:50 -0700
typed in alt.windows7.general the following:

By the way, a very minor point and even farther off-topic than Word and
WordPerfect, but it's normally "et alii," abbreviated "et al.," not "et
alia." And that phrase is used to refer to people, not things. For
things, "etc." is used.

Thank you. My Latin is abysmal.
--
pyotr filipivich
Next month's Panel: Graft - Boon or blessing?

On 2/23/2020 9:56 AM, pyotr filipivich wrote:
Steve Hayes on Sun, 23 Feb 2020 10:23:09 +0200
typed in alt.windows7.general the following:
On Sat, 22 Feb 2020 19:46:12 -0800, pyotr filipivich
wrote:

"Mayayana" on Sat, 22 Feb 2020 16:31:48
-0500 typed in alt.windows7.general the following:
"pyotr filipivich" wrote
| The short form: I've been using WP for decades, I have a gut
| reaction against the Evil Empire anyway, and Word also wants to
| enhance my computer experience with more freeping dancing bunnies*
| Hope that explains enough.

So you don't necessarily think it's better... you're
just used to it? I've never had occasion to do all
the things you've needed to do, like making a
brochure.

it is as much of a case of I started out just needing to produce
papers for class, getting the home version when I got the home
computer, and over the years found "new" things it could do. I don't
know how one would establish an objective standard of "Word processor
quality".
Notepad and wordpad will handle _most_ people's "word processing"
demands. That is, enter text, edit it, print it out. Whether it is a
memo, letter, or class paper, that's all they really want/need; a
glorified typewriter. All the fonts, formatting, headers, footers and
the rest - for the person who wants to write a letter home, all those
other options are "bloatware".
As I said, I messed about with Gutenberg, and some Desktop
Publishing Software. Gutenberg will handle plain text, you could use
if for letter writing. But it could also "mark up" a document for a
"fancy" result. In 1985, it was pretty cool. It also handled Cyrillic
(and Hebrew) which is why I stumbled across it. I'm trying to figure
out Scribus, because it may do some DTP which I want done. (Mostly,
producing a small booklet of the morning prayers.)

I still use Xywite, a DOS word rocessor that is more powerful than MS
Word, and fits on a 360 floppy disk.

It lacks the bells and whistles that Word has, but as wordprocessors
go, it has more pistons and cylinders.

Again, what are you attempting to do? Send a letter? No need to
get out the printing press, a typewriter will do.


Two points:

The first one is personal: I used to own a very good, very expensive IBM
typewriter; I gave it away soon after I got my first PC, in 1987.

But more important, as far as I'm concerned, is that a typewriter is a
*very* poor substitute for almost any word processor. Even a primitive
word processor like WordPad (really more a glorified text editor than a
real word processor) is *far* better than a typewriter, for the
following reasons:

1. a word processor makes it much easier to correct errors.

2. a word processor makes it much easier to add text in the middle of
the letter, should it be desired.

3. a word processor makes it much easier to rearrange the order of the text.

4. a word processor lets you save the letter so it can be sent others,
with or without modifications.

5. a word processor lets you easily modify text as desired, changing to
bold, italics, larger font etc. Not only can you do this as you type,
but it's easy to go back and do it after you've finished typing the
letter. Even if you have a fancy typewriter that can do it, it can't go
back to do it.

6. Probably lots of other reasons, but the above are the ones that
quickly come to mind.

--
Ken

On 2/23/2020 9:57 AM, pyotr filipivich wrote:
Ken Blake on Sun, 23 Feb 2020 09:00:50 -0700
typed in alt.windows7.general the following:

By the way, a very minor point and even farther off-topic than Word and
WordPerfect, but it's normally "et alii," abbreviated "et al.," not "et
alia." And that phrase is used to refer to people, not things. For
things, "etc." is used.

Thank you. My Latin is abysmal.


You're welcome. Glad to help.



--
Ken

On 2/23/2020 9:56 AM, pyotr filipivich wrote:

"J. P. Gilliver (John)" on Sun, 23 Feb 2020
11:11:42 +0000 typed in alt.windows7.general the following:

In many of these cases, we probably have muscle memory of how to do it
in whichever one we're used to.

And that, as much as anything, is the basis for a lot of
complaints: WP v Word. Win-XP vs Windows 7,8,10..N, the new car vs the
old one, etc, etc.

I suppose that's possible for me with WordPerfect vs Word, but I don't
think so. I'll grant you the possibility, though.

But with XP vs later versions oF Windows, old car vs new car, definitely
not. Except for Windows Me and 8, I've always thought that each version
of Windows was better than its predecessor. Similarly, I've liked each
new car I've gotten better than the one before it.

For others, the basis for complaints? Yes, I agree with that.

--
Ken

In article , Ken Blake
wrote:


Again, what are you attempting to do? Send a letter? No need to
get out the printing press, a typewriter will do.


Two points:

The first one is personal: I used to own a very good, very expensive IBM
typewriter; I gave it away soon after I got my first PC, in 1987.

But more important, as far as I'm concerned, is that a typewriter is a
*very* poor substitute for almost any word processor. Even a primitive
word processor like WordPad (really more a glorified text editor than a
real word processor) is *far* better than a typewriter, for the
following reasons:

1. a word processor makes it much easier to correct errors.

2. a word processor makes it much easier to add text in the middle of
the letter, should it be desired.

3. a word processor makes it much easier to rearrange the order of the text.

4. a word processor lets you save the letter so it can be sent others,
with or without modifications.

5. a word processor lets you easily modify text as desired, changing to
bold, italics, larger font etc. Not only can you do this as you type,
but it's easy to go back and do it after you've finished typing the
letter. Even if you have a fancy typewriter that can do it, it can't go
back to do it.

6. Probably lots of other reasons, but the above are the ones that
quickly come to mind.

embedded graphics. paste a photo or chart in the middle of the text,
with the text wrapping around if desired.

formatting and layout. text can easily be put in columns for a
brochure, flyer or booklet, including on both sides of the page and
done so that it folds properly.

interoperability with other apps. embed a chart from excel, and when
the spreadsheet data updates, so does the text document that has just
the chart.

table of contents & index automatically updated as the document changes.

hypertext and password protected documents.

On Sunday, February 23, 2020 at 9:54:46 AM UTC-7, pyotr filipivich wrote:
knuttle on Sun, 23 Feb 2020 07:15:58
-0500 typed in alt.windows7.general the following:
On 2/23/2020 6:57 AM, mechanic wrote:
On Sun, 23 Feb 2020 10:23:09 +0200, Steve Hayes wrote:

I still use Xywite, a DOS word rocessor that is more powerful than MS
Word, and fits on a 360 floppy disk.

It lacks the bells and whistles that Word has, but as wordprocessors
go, it has more pistons and cylinders.

We all seem to prefer using what we are used to, using a mew tool
takes time and effort. Pity there's no FrameMaker available cheaply
on Windows.

I use WordPerfect. The first word processor I had was a DOS based word
processor on my IBM Jr. I also used in on my first IBM AT. Then for a
short period the company went to MS Word. I used that for years.

I found that MS Word and WordPerfect were both good for the original
document.

However at one time part of my job was to manage a document system.
Editing old MS documents was a pain as traces of formatting form
previous revision collected in the document, until the only solution to
further edit the document was to convert to ASCII, Open it in MS Word
and completely redo the formatting. If WordPerfect the process was
significantly simplified as you could find the offending formatting code
and remove it. This could be done with out going through the ACSII step
and reformatting as in MS Word.

It is the "complex document" vs "I just need to write a letter /
class paper.

Kind of reminds me of why CAD "took off". It wasn't that using
CAD is faster in making the initial drawings, but that it make
revising a drawing "easier" than having to start over.

Consequently today I use WordPerfect because of the ability to purge
problem formatting code with out redoing the complete document. I also
use Quattro Pro.
--
pyotr filipivich
Next month's Panel: Graft - Boon or blessing?



Char Jackson claims to be the database-professor, let's see him put up a form minus the shipping/handling loops.

Shadow duped Char Jackson as much as he deserves, big ****ing deal. Char Jackson is being a howling asshole about it? You do realize that the massive floods ending up in multiple groups started out as a joke about hacking Google. It's Char Jackson's problem and he has to want to deal with it. Obviously he would rather blame Shadow than face reality.

This is clearly an interest of mine. Char Jackson doesn't have any clue what he is crying about.

--
Best CMS Solution of 2017
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v= AglvCo3dJ38&feature=youtu.be
http://usenet.sandman.net/misc/posti.../Snit/Flooding
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=prZeTJKpc3Y
Jonas Eklundh Communication AB

On Sunday, February 23, 2020 at 10:31:58 AM UTC-7, nospam wrote:
In article , Ken Blake
wrote:


Again, what are you attempting to do? Send a letter? No need to
get out the printing press, a typewriter will do.


Two points:

The first one is personal: I used to own a very good, very expensive IBM
typewriter; I gave it away soon after I got my first PC, in 1987.

But more important, as far as I'm concerned, is that a typewriter is a
*very* poor substitute for almost any word processor. Even a primitive
word processor like WordPad (really more a glorified text editor than a
real word processor) is *far* better than a typewriter, for the
following reasons:

1. a word processor makes it much easier to correct errors.

2. a word processor makes it much easier to add text in the middle of
the letter, should it be desired.

3. a word processor makes it much easier to rearrange the order of the text.

4. a word processor lets you save the letter so it can be sent others,
with or without modifications.

5. a word processor lets you easily modify text as desired, changing to
bold, italics, larger font etc. Not only can you do this as you type,
but it's easy to go back and do it after you've finished typing the
letter. Even if you have a fancy typewriter that can do it, it can't go
back to do it.

6. Probably lots of other reasons, but the above are the ones that
quickly come to mind.

embedded graphics. paste a photo or chart in the middle of the text,
with the text wrapping around if desired.

formatting and layout. text can easily be put in columns for a
brochure, flyer or booklet, including on both sides of the page and
done so that it folds properly.

interoperability with other apps. embed a chart from excel, and when
the spreadsheet data updates, so does the text document that has just
the chart.

table of contents & index automatically updated as the document changes.

hypertext and password protected documents.



Several denizens continue talking to David Shill Brooks. To be honest, I do not blame Apd for having his dander up but I do not see why he stays here with David Shill Brooks here. Apd is better at dialog as seen in a moderated forum and open newsgroups make him want to puke. Just look at David Shill Brooks's 'tasks' and look at mine, there is nothing for anyone to learn from a jerk like David Shill Brooks. But whatever, let him keep making a cretin of himself. It is not like anyone believes him. It's a spam message. David Shill Brooks has already decided what he is going to say before he calls.. What you say is beside the point. What Apd says is ignored.

Apd's computer has more memory than David Shill Brooks's. Apd wins. David Shill Brooks loses. Nothing LCD about it.

The cult-like herd's reverse compiled Unity with a takeoff of Pseudo-Context Free Grammar to produce posts which are made to sound like a response from a previous post in the group. After ignoring all the flooding, it's just two of them authoring nearly all of the barrage. No doubt. And both totally unstable losers.



--
Live on Kickstarter
https://youtu.be/Z5wo5aE7MUk
Jonas Eklundh

Ken Blake wrote:
On 2/23/2020 9:38 AM, Jonathan N. Little wrote:
Ken Blake wrote:
Yes. Same with Windows vs Apple, vs Linux; FireFox vs Chrome vs Edge;
Ford, vs GM; Toyota vs Honda vs Nissan; etc. etc. etc.

Naw, Edge just universally sucks... ;-)


I completely agree with you. Bur my point is that not everyone does.



Web developers agree:

http://www.littleworksstudio.com/temp/usenet/WebDevelopmentStandarization

--
Take care,

Jonathan
-------------------
LITTLE WORKS STUDIO
http://www.LittleWorksStudio.com

In message , pyotr
filipivich writes:
"J. P. Gilliver (John)" on Sun, 23 Feb 2020
11:11:42 +0000 typed in alt.windows7.general the following:
[]
Word's style system _does_ have a "change all 36 examples of this
style?" prompt. (Thanks for mention of Format Painter - so that's what
it's for! I've never used it.)

And see, you've learned something new about your preferred
software.

Actually, it's not my _preferred_: unlike most other similar situations,
where the one I know _is_ my preferred, it's just the one I know (a lot
of) how to use. I suppose that does make it my preferred in that I don't
want to learn another one, but I don't really have an affection for it -
in fact much about it (Word) irritates me.
[]
Like engineering standards, (and computer standards), the nice
thing is there are so many to chose from.

"You are in a maze of twisty standards, all different." (Not original -
and only those of a certain age will get the reference ...)
[]
I also suspect that that there is a lot of "legacy" standards from
the days of pen and parchment.

Quill pen, indeed, for legal work. (Actually, much has been done
recently - in UK legal circles, anyway - to improve the
comprehensibility of legal text: the days of hundreds-of-words sentences
and no punctuation are mostly gone.)
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

Feudalism : It's your count that votes.

In message , Mayayana
writes:
"J. P. Gilliver (John)" wrote

| I actually see very little discussion of Wordpad.

I don't think most people know it exists. I find that
most people don't even know Notepad exists. Either they
use MS Word for work, or they don't need word processing
outside of email. I run into people who don't know cut,
copy, paste!
But it's been my impression that Wordpad is essentially
the old version of Word. It could probably easily satisfy
most peoples' needs if it were polished up a bit. MS probably
keep it primitive deliberately. Though RTF format has had
[]
You remind me of the old Works suite; a cheaper alternative to Office -
it had a word processor and a spreadsheet, I can't remember whether a
presentation package or anything else. It was basic, but I think the WP
was slightly better than Write (which is another WP that was better than
given credit for). Works also was undemanding on computer resources. The
last edition or two, it came with (the then-current version of) Word (or
it might have been the previous one) rather than its own WP, since WP
was all _most_ home users needed. I'm still convinced MS killed off
Works because it was affecting the sales of Office.

I think that, also, standardization can't be overestimated.
Schools and businesses use MS Word. If you don't have
the latest version "you're a rotten egg". It really is that
childish.

Except the childishness extends to potential interactors being denied
business )-:.

When my neice was at college around 2005-ish
she told me they were forced to buy MS Office. I don't
know exactly what "forced" meant, but to her it clearly
meant there was no choice in the classes she was taking.
Which makes sense. The teachers probably all had MS Office
and it's likely that not one of them would have had any idea
how to deal with anything but a DOC file. Most of them
probably didn't even know about file extensions. The
conveniences also serve as chains, locking people in.

Agreed.

2
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

Feudalism : It's your count that votes.

On Sunday, February 23, 2020 at 2:11:25 PM UTC-7, J. P. Gilliver (John) wrote:
In message , pyotr
filipivich writes:
"J. P. Gilliver (John)" on Sun, 23 Feb 2020
11:11:42 +0000 typed in alt.windows7.general the following:
[]
Word's style system _does_ have a "change all 36 examples of this
style?" prompt. (Thanks for mention of Format Painter - so that's what
it's for! I've never used it.)

And see, you've learned something new about your preferred
software.

Actually, it's not my _preferred_: unlike most other similar situations,
where the one I know _is_ my preferred, it's just the one I know (a lot
of) how to use. I suppose that does make it my preferred in that I don't
want to learn another one, but I don't really have an affection for it -
in fact much about it (Word) irritates me.
[]
Like engineering standards, (and computer standards), the nice
thing is there are so many to chose from.

"You are in a maze of twisty standards, all different." (Not original -
and only those of a certain age will get the reference ...)
[]
I also suspect that that there is a lot of "legacy" standards from
the days of pen and parchment.

Quill pen, indeed, for legal work. (Actually, much has been done
recently - in UK legal circles, anyway - to improve the
comprehensibility of legal text: the days of hundreds-of-words sentences
and no punctuation are mostly gone.)
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

Feudalism : It's your count that votes.



It is not shocking that Wolffan feigned indifference at the aspect of being seen as credible... knowing that it is unlikely to ever happen. With no reason at all, as is usual for Wolffan.

Just bull**** from him. But he has completely left objectivity behind and is merely holding me at fault for the exploits of himself.

Like most everyone else in political groups, Wolffan relies on biased science to contrive his convictions on subjects. As such, he only is familiar with and accepts the accepted claims which also are the ones which paint socialists in a very auspicious and ethical way. I bet Wolffan thinks his wife's life was worse than Mike Easter's.



--
This broke the Internet
https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/...resolution=---
https://groups.google.com/forum/#!to...em/6m_7Z7rQ6Hg
http://bit.ly/2oNYRgv
Jonas Eklundh Communication

Ken Blake on Sun, 23 Feb 2020 10:18:27 -0700
typed in alt.windows7.general the following:
On 2/23/2020 9:56 AM, pyotr filipivich wrote:
Steve Hayes on Sun, 23 Feb 2020 10:23:09 +0200
typed in alt.windows7.general the following:
On Sat, 22 Feb 2020 19:46:12 -0800, pyotr filipivich
wrote:

"Mayayana" on Sat, 22 Feb 2020 16:31:48
-0500 typed in alt.windows7.general the following:
"pyotr filipivich" wrote
| The short form: I've been using WP for decades, I have a gut
| reaction against the Evil Empire anyway, and Word also wants to
| enhance my computer experience with more freeping dancing bunnies*
| Hope that explains enough.

So you don't necessarily think it's better... you're
just used to it? I've never had occasion to do all
the things you've needed to do, like making a
brochure.

it is as much of a case of I started out just needing to produce
papers for class, getting the home version when I got the home
computer, and over the years found "new" things it could do. I don't
know how one would establish an objective standard of "Word processor
quality".
Notepad and wordpad will handle _most_ people's "word processing"
demands. That is, enter text, edit it, print it out. Whether it is a
memo, letter, or class paper, that's all they really want/need; a
glorified typewriter. All the fonts, formatting, headers, footers and
the rest - for the person who wants to write a letter home, all those
other options are "bloatware".
As I said, I messed about with Gutenberg, and some Desktop
Publishing Software. Gutenberg will handle plain text, you could use
if for letter writing. But it could also "mark up" a document for a
"fancy" result. In 1985, it was pretty cool. It also handled Cyrillic
(and Hebrew) which is why I stumbled across it. I'm trying to figure
out Scribus, because it may do some DTP which I want done. (Mostly,
producing a small booklet of the morning prayers.)

I still use Xywite, a DOS word rocessor that is more powerful than MS
Word, and fits on a 360 floppy disk.

It lacks the bells and whistles that Word has, but as wordprocessors
go, it has more pistons and cylinders.

Again, what are you attempting to do? Send a letter? No need to
get out the printing press, a typewriter will do.


Two points:

The first one is personal: I used to own a very good, very expensive IBM
typewriter; I gave it away soon after I got my first PC, in 1987.

I swapped my electric typewriter for a manual. If there was
power, I used the computer. If there wasn't there was the typewriter.
(And for filling out multi part forms, inkjets just do not work.)

But more important, as far as I'm concerned, is that a typewriter is a
*very* poor substitute for almost any word processor. Even a primitive
word processor like WordPad (really more a glorified text editor than a
real word processor) is *far* better than a typewriter, for the
following reasons:

1. a word processor makes it much easier to correct errors.

2. a word processor makes it much easier to add text in the middle of
the letter, should it be desired.

3. a word processor makes it much easier to rearrange the order of the text.

4. a word processor lets you save the letter so it can be sent others,
with or without modifications.

5. a word processor lets you easily modify text as desired, changing to
bold, italics, larger font etc. Not only can you do this as you type,
but it's easy to go back and do it after you've finished typing the
letter. Even if you have a fancy typewriter that can do it, it can't go
back to do it.

6. Probably lots of other reasons, but the above are the ones that
quickly come to mind.

I think you missed the illustration:
Typewriter. Capable of producing a paper, letter. Not so good
for producing a book.
Printing press. Very good for producing a book, with or without
illustrations. You can even have different size letters, fancy fonts
(Italic /bold, etc) Not really efficient for sending a letter.
(Unless you intend to run off a hundred copies, in which case...)

By analogy:
Notepad: good for basic "word processing": enter text, edit text,
save to storage media. Write a letter / paper.
Word (etc): can do the basic word processing as notepad, but also
does all the wonderful things you pointed out and much more. Whether
you need them or not, it loaded all the bells and whistles into
memory, allocated and tied up resources, all so you can type "Dear
Mom, I will be home for Christmas, your son."

With notepad/wordpad, I do not need to load the bloatware which is
Word (or WordPerfect), just "click" and the window opens, I can start
typing. Or pasting. Sure, I can't do many of the things which Word
can do, but I don't necessarily want to do all those other things, and
I don't have to wait for the all in one program to start.

For me, the majority of my typing is one to two page letters,
memorandum for files, and other simple stuff which doesn't need a full
up Office Suite to be done. Heck, I could write them out long hand.
So what I _want_ most often in a "word processor" is something
which does just that: handle simple document production.
I have said, if I had the skills, I'd create a program "My
Typewriter" which has one or two fonts, underline and italic options,
margin adjust, and you can specify page size. And a word counter. ("I
need five hundred words on _Peter Rabbit_. Typing "the very, very,
very, very end." 500 words!)
But as I think about it, okay, I need to add footnotes (I could do
them on the typewriter, I just had to plan ahead.) and, and, and ...
"Never mind, I'm going back to the hand written book project."





--
pyotr filipivich
Next month's Panel: Graft - Boon or blessing?