Atlantis Word Processor

On 2/13/14 7:12 PM, Ken Blake wrote:
On Fri, 14 Feb 2014 00:55:52 +0000, "J. P. Gilliver (John)"
wrote:

In message , Ken Springer
writes:
[]
I've never used Works, nor had a copy past vers. 4, but I've always
felt the later versions of Works had about the same abilities of Word
6, more or less.

Well, the very last few versions, I think, actually came with Word,
rather than the Works word processor.


Last few versions of what? Windows?

Neither Windows 7, nor any other version of Windows (except Windows 8
RT), has ever included Works, Excel, Word, PowerPoint, Access, nor any
other significant application software. Such programs have to be
bought, either by themselves or as part of Microsoft Office.

But Works used to be bundled with other software packages on some
computer systems. My Dell with Win 98 came with version 4 of Works.


--
Ken

Mac OS X 10.8.5
Firefox 24.0
Thunderbird 24.0

In message , Ken Blake
writes:
On Fri, 14 Feb 2014 00:55:52 +0000, "J. P. Gilliver (John)"
wrote:

In message , Ken Springer
writes:
[]
I've never used Works, nor had a copy past vers. 4, but I've always
felt the later versions of Works had about the same abilities of Word
6, more or less.

Well, the very last few versions, I think, actually came with Word,
rather than the Works word processor.


Last few versions of what? Windows?

Works.

Neither Windows 7, nor any other version of Windows (except Windows 8
RT), has ever included Works, Excel, Word, PowerPoint, Access, nor any
other significant application software. Such programs have to be
bought, either by themselves or as part of Microsoft Office.

The last few versions of Works came with Word as their WP rather than
the original Works one.
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

Eve had an Apple, Adam had a Wang...

In ,
J. P. Gilliver (John) typed:
In message , Ken Springer
writes:
[]
I've never used Works, nor had a copy past vers. 4, but I've always
felt the later versions of Works had about the same abilities of Word
6, more or less.

Well, the very last few versions, I think, actually came with Word,
rather than the Works word processor.

Actually they were a separate product from MS Works. And they came under
the following names:

Home Essentials 97
Home Essentials 98
Works Suite 99
Works Deluxe 99
Works Suite 2000
Works Suite 2001
Works Suite 2002
Works Suite 2003
Works Suite 2004
Works Suite 2005
Works Suite 2006
Works Plus 2008

They included a lot more than just Word (except for Works Plus 2008).
For example, Works Suite 2006 also included Encarta Standard, Money,
Streets and Trips Essentials, and Digital Image Standard. The Chicago
Tribune called them as "one of the best bargains ever offered."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microsoft_Works

--
Bill
Gateway M465e ('06 era) - OE-QuoteFix v1.19.2
Centrino Core2 Duo T5600 1.83GHz - 4GB - Windows XP SP2

On Thu, 13 Feb 2014 20:17:32 -0700, Ken Springer
wrote:

On 2/13/14 7:12 PM, Ken Blake wrote:
On Fri, 14 Feb 2014 00:55:52 +0000, "J. P. Gilliver (John)"
wrote:

In message , Ken Springer
writes:
[]
I've never used Works, nor had a copy past vers. 4, but I've always
felt the later versions of Works had about the same abilities of Word
6, more or less.

Well, the very last few versions, I think, actually came with Word,
rather than the Works word processor.


Last few versions of what? Windows?

Neither Windows 7, nor any other version of Windows (except Windows 8
RT), has ever included Works, Excel, Word, PowerPoint, Access, nor any
other significant application software. Such programs have to be
bought, either by themselves or as part of Microsoft Office.

But Works used to be bundled with other software packages on some
computer systems. My Dell with Win 98 came with version 4 of Works.



Yes, but it was bundled by Dell in what they sold you. It did *not*
come with Windows. Some OEM machines were also bundled with Microsoft
Office.

On Fri, 14 Feb 2014 07:17:31 +0000, "J. P. Gilliver (John)"
wrote:

In message , Ken Blake
writes:
On Fri, 14 Feb 2014 00:55:52 +0000, "J. P. Gilliver (John)"
wrote:

In message , Ken Springer
writes:
[]
I've never used Works, nor had a copy past vers. 4, but I've always
felt the later versions of Works had about the same abilities of Word
6, more or less.

Well, the very last few versions, I think, actually came with Word,
rather than the Works word processor.


Last few versions of what? Windows?

Works.



Ah, sorry for misunderstanding you.

On 2/14/14 8:37 AM, Ken Blake wrote:
On Thu, 13 Feb 2014 20:17:32 -0700, Ken Springer
wrote:

On 2/13/14 7:12 PM, Ken Blake wrote:
On Fri, 14 Feb 2014 00:55:52 +0000, "J. P. Gilliver (John)"
wrote:

In message , Ken Springer
writes:
[]
I've never used Works, nor had a copy past vers. 4, but I've always
felt the later versions of Works had about the same abilities of Word
6, more or less.

Well, the very last few versions, I think, actually came with Word,
rather than the Works word processor.


Last few versions of what? Windows?

Neither Windows 7, nor any other version of Windows (except Windows 8
RT), has ever included Works, Excel, Word, PowerPoint, Access, nor any
other significant application software. Such programs have to be
bought, either by themselves or as part of Microsoft Office.

But Works used to be bundled with other software packages on some
computer systems. My Dell with Win 98 came with version 4 of Works.



Yes, but it was bundled by Dell in what they sold you. It did *not*
come with Windows. Some OEM machines were also bundled with Microsoft
Office.

Agreed, but I didn't intentionally mean to imply it was part of Windows.
Just that it was a separate program included with some computer packages.



--
Ken

Mac OS X 10.8.5
Firefox 24.0
Thunderbird 24.0

On Thu, 13 Feb 2014 20:14:03 -0700, Ken Springer
wrote:
On 2/13/14 7:37 PM, Mayayana wrote:

| So which browser would you recommend that people use?

I don't know. As I was saying earlier, I feel that
there just isn't any good option now.

My view is that each person should decide for himself which browser
best meets his needs and likes. We all have different standards and
what's best for one of us isn't necessarily best for everyone else.
Personally I like Maxthon the best. I don't want to recommend that
everyone use it, but do recommend that everyone at least give it a try
and see how they like it.

And I feel the same way about all kinds of software, not just
browsers.

In message , BillW50
writes:
In ,
J. P. Gilliver (John) typed:
In message , Ken Springer
writes:
[]
I've never used Works, nor had a copy past vers. 4, but I've always
felt the later versions of Works had about the same abilities of Word
6, more or less.

Well, the very last few versions, I think, actually came with Word,
rather than the Works word processor.

Actually they were a separate product from MS Works. And they came under
the following names:

Home Essentials 97
Home Essentials 98
Works Suite 99
Works Deluxe 99
Works Suite 2000
Works Suite 2001
Works Suite 2002
Works Suite 2003
Works Suite 2004
Works Suite 2005
Works Suite 2006
Works Plus 2008

OK, you got me! I remembered seeing _something_ with the word "Works"
somewhere on the packaging, but that included Word.

They included a lot more than just Word (except for Works Plus 2008).
For example, Works Suite 2006 also included Encarta Standard, Money,

Oh yes, I remember those (vaguely!) now.

Streets and Trips Essentials, and Digital Image Standard. The Chicago
Tribune called them as "one of the best bargains ever offered."

It might well have been, at that time.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microsoft_Works

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

The voices of Radio 4 continuity and newsreading have been keeping me right
for as long as I can remember. I can call on a million different information
sources, but it doesn't make sense unti I've heard it from Peter, Harriet,
Charlotte and the rest.- Eddie Mair in Radio Times 10-16 November 2012

On Fri, 14 Feb 2014 08:40:17 -0700, Ken Springer
wrote:

On 2/14/14 8:37 AM, Ken Blake wrote:
On Thu, 13 Feb 2014 20:17:32 -0700, Ken Springer
wrote:

On 2/13/14 7:12 PM, Ken Blake wrote:
On Fri, 14 Feb 2014 00:55:52 +0000, "J. P. Gilliver (John)"
wrote:

In message , Ken Springer
writes:
[]
I've never used Works, nor had a copy past vers. 4, but I've always
felt the later versions of Works had about the same abilities of Word
6, more or less.

Well, the very last few versions, I think, actually came with Word,
rather than the Works word processor.


Last few versions of what? Windows?

Neither Windows 7, nor any other version of Windows (except Windows 8
RT), has ever included Works, Excel, Word, PowerPoint, Access, nor any
other significant application software. Such programs have to be
bought, either by themselves or as part of Microsoft Office.

But Works used to be bundled with other software packages on some
computer systems. My Dell with Win 98 came with version 4 of Works.



Yes, but it was bundled by Dell in what they sold you. It did *not*
come with Windows. Some OEM machines were also bundled with Microsoft
Office.

Agreed, but I didn't intentionally mean to imply it was part of Windows.
Just that it was a separate program included with some computer packages.



OK, but when your reply began with "but," I assumed that you were
disagreeing with what I said.


Mac OS X 10.8.5
Firefox 24.0
Thunderbird 24.0

On 2/13/2014, Ken Springer posted:
Spam's been around forever but while the Internet population was
small,
sending spam wasn't very profitable and there was a much smaller
amount
of it.

At least since World War II. Made by Hormel. LOL

Sorry folks, couldn't resist!

After being in the Army during WWII, my father was forever *totally*
able to resist Spam.

Sorry Ken, couldn't resist!

--
Gene E. Bloch (Stumbling Bloch)

On 13/02/2014 9:37 PM, Mayayana wrote:
| So which browser would you recommend that people use?

I don't know. As I was saying earlier, I feel that
there just isn't any good option now. I'm just
hoping that more people will begin to stop and
decide that all the commercialization and intrusion
of privacy has gone too far. Then maybe the whole
medium could be improved.

I usually install Firefox or Pale Moon for friends, but
I think of those as the lesser of the evils. I would
never use IE online, and would never use Chrome at
all. (I know a great deal about IE. I know very little
about Chrome. But Google clearly doesn't want to
protect privacy or serve the public good. To a great
extent they're responsible for the Internet being
reduced to a retail shopping venue. By ranking sites
based partly on incoming links they've essentially
removed small, non-commercial sites from the Web.
I rarely even use their search engine any more. The
links now all go through the Google server as a proxy,
to allow full tracking of all activity on their page and
to send ahead ID data to the destination website.
And for anyone who allows Google to track them,
even the search results themselves are skewed by
Google.)

FF and PM are pretty good for me personally, but I
know a lot about how to customize them and control
their behavior, despite that the Mozilla people keep
changing it. For the average person who doesn't deal
with browser settings at all, much less Mozilla prefs
settings, HOSTS, or userContent.css, I just think of
FF/PM as currently being the least bad in terms of
privacy and security.

I'd certainly be interested to hear if someone knows
a better option. I'm not aware of any.

No matter how many times I change, I usually go back to Firefox (with
all of its blatant flaws) as a result of its support for HTTPS
Everywhere and Ghostery. Those two add-ons improve the browsing
experience tremendously and it's very hard to ignore that. I don't know
how far Google's involvement in developing Firefox goes but I'll have to
hope that their lack of respect for peoples' privacy doesn't influence
the code too greatly.

--
Silver Slimer
'Linux ****' on google.ca = About 5,460,000 results (0.30 seconds)

| No matter how many times I change, I usually go back to Firefox (with
| all of its blatant flaws) as a result of its support for HTTPS
| Everywhere and Ghostery. Those two add-ons improve the browsing
| experience tremendously and it's very hard to ignore that. I don't know
| how far Google's involvement in developing Firefox goes but I'll have to
| hope that their lack of respect for peoples' privacy doesn't influence
| the code too greatly.

I read your post and then went to look at today's
tech news and found this:

http://www.zdnet.com/mozilla-clarifi...on-7000026335/

Mitchell Baker, head of Mozilla, trying to justify
ads in Firefox. She has a hard time even acknowledging
that they're ads, preferring to cast them as useful
features for Firefox fans. Further on she explains that
the ads are part of a plan to finance Firefox OS. It
seems to be an interesting pickle: Mozilla is becoming
corrupted as it turns toward a services approach and
removes customizing functionality that interferes with
commercialism. On the other hand, Baker has a point.
An increasing number of people just want easy services
and don't much care about software options. And I
suppose that if I ever decide to buy a "smart phone",
I'd rather have one with Firefox OS than Windows,
Android, or Apple iOS.... but only assuming that Firefox
OS doesn't end up commercializing in the process of
becoming Firefox OS.

On 15/02/2014 9:38 AM, Mayayana wrote:
| No matter how many times I change, I usually go back to Firefox (with
| all of its blatant flaws) as a result of its support for HTTPS
| Everywhere and Ghostery. Those two add-ons improve the browsing
| experience tremendously and it's very hard to ignore that. I don't know
| how far Google's involvement in developing Firefox goes but I'll have to
| hope that their lack of respect for peoples' privacy doesn't influence
| the code too greatly.

I read your post and then went to look at today's
tech news and found this:

http://www.zdnet.com/mozilla-clarifi...on-7000026335/

Mitchell Baker, head of Mozilla, trying to justify
ads in Firefox. She has a hard time even acknowledging
that they're ads, preferring to cast them as useful
features for Firefox fans. Further on she explains that
the ads are part of a plan to finance Firefox OS. It
seems to be an interesting pickle: Mozilla is becoming
corrupted as it turns toward a services approach and
removes customizing functionality that interferes with
commercialism. On the other hand, Baker has a point.
An increasing number of people just want easy services
and don't much care about software options. And I
suppose that if I ever decide to buy a "smart phone",
I'd rather have one with Firefox OS than Windows,
Android, or Apple iOS.... but only assuming that Firefox
OS doesn't end up commercializing in the process of
becoming Firefox OS.

Since that post, Firefox twice became stuck in memory and forced me to
kill it from within the Task Manager. Essentially, the program has
thrown away the last chance I was willing to give it.
--
Silver Slimer

| Since that post, Firefox twice became stuck in memory and forced me to
| kill it from within the Task Manager. Essentially, the program has
| thrown away the last chance I was willing to give it.

Interesting. I haven't had even one problem
with FF or Pale Moon for years. But you seem to
be on Win7-64, while I only use Win7 for testing
software and such. I mainly use XP-32. Maybe
the 64-bit version is not as stable? I don't know.
I also don't use tabs. When I hear of people
complaining about browsers it's often the case
that they're never closing tabs during a browsing
session. I imagine that numerous open tabs
updating might be quite a strain on Firefox.

One thing I do that also might affect that is that
I set accessibility.blockautorefresh to True.
Though I didn't choose the setting for stability.
I have two other reasons: 1) It drives me crazy
when I'm reading a news article and it suddenly
reloads by itself. 2) Some sites will load a perfectly
usable page but then replace it, when they detect
I have javascript disabled, with a blank page that
says, "Sorry, this page requires javascript."

Gene E. Bloch posted this via news:ldlqnm$ffl
:

On 2/13/2014, Ken Springer posted:
Spam's been around forever but while the Internet population was
small,
sending spam wasn't very profitable and there was a much smaller
amount
of it.

At least since World War II. Made by Hormel. LOL

Sorry folks, couldn't resist!

After being in the Army during WWII, my father was forever *totally*
able to resist Spam.

Sorry Ken, couldn't resist!

Being stationed overseas with the US Military, Spam is such a desired
product by the natives that the exchanges and commissaries actually monitor
and control its distribution (as well as certain other black-marketable
items) using a "Ration-Card" system.

It was presented to me in Japan after being prepared by cooking smothered
in garlic, onions and mushrooms. I asked what it was. They said "dog."

I almost vomited. They laughed and said "Naw, it's just Spam!" Then, I
thought it actually tasted quite good.

HTH.

--

I AM Bucky Breeder, (*(^; and FYI :
Of course God loves *everybody* equally...
He's just got a really strange sense of humor.

http://tinyurl.com/7fude4d