🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <3e493d34$1$ofgrcuna$mr2ice@news.redshift.com>, 
bstephan@redshift.com says...
> In <b2ba6s326p2@enews3.newsguy.com>, on 02/11/03 
>    at 11:59 AM, J. Clarke <nospam1@nospam.invalid> said:
> 
> >> Wordstar by 
> >> Word.
> 
> >Deservedly.  The producers of Wordstar didn't even recompile the
> >blasted  thing for the PC, they ported the binary.  Dog slow.
> 
> I tried Word at that time and it was dog slow too. Seemed like I
> remember seconds of delay between the time I pressed a key and the
> character appeared on the screen.

Odd.  My secretary at the time, who was a damnably fast typist, had no 
trouble in that regard on a 4.77 MHz PC with a Hercules board.  Are you 
sure you're thinking of DOS Word and not the early versions of WinWord?

> I also had terrible luck with
> WordPerfect, especially the printing on an industry standard Epson at
> the time.

Word Perfect's printer handling wasn't very good either.  In fact I 
never really understood the appeal of that product.  One nice thing 
about DOS Word was that they made the printer driver extremely 
configurable.

> I went with a lesser known product that did a good job but
> never became well known. My knack for finding good products (e.g.
> OS/2) that never became industry standards could be the subject of a
> long thread.
> 
> 

-- 
--
--John
Reply to jclarke at ae tee tee global dot net
(used to be jclarke at eye bee em dot net)