🚀 go-pugleaf

Robert A. Jung (rjung@aludra.usc.edu) wrote re Calligrapher:
>   Seriously, it's an incredible package, and well worth the money. It's as if
> you took WORDUP, removed ALL the bugs, made it crash-proof, and added more
> features -- you'd have Calligrapher. It delivers everything it promises, and
> I have yet to be upset that I bought the darn thing.

I agree with this assessment; Calligrapher is a first-class document processor
IMHO (I can't agree with it being entirely "crash-proof", but how much
software is?).

>   I like the fact that it uses standard GDOS fonts as well as Calligrapher's
> own outline font format. The outline fonts are terrific, and it's incredibly

The ability to use standard GDOS fonts is in my view very important for any ST
word-processor. I was therefore disappointed to find that amongst the
features listed in the new version of Calligrapher is the abandonment of
support for GEM bitmap fonts. I phoned Working Title to check this recently
but the person I spoke to seemed not to be in a communicative frame of mind,
so I can only guess at the reason for this change.