🚀 go-pugleaf

From article <1991Mar29.100252.105@gnv.ifas.ufl.edu>, by sjs@gnv.ifas.ufl.edu:
> I've used WordPerfect and Word (DOS version), and I prefer Word.  It's
> too easy in WP to trip over those stupid imbedded codes, accidently delete
> codes (like column format), or end up with codes being duplicated thousands
> of times.  Or, if you move the cursor over one too many spaces in WP, you
> can end up beyond or in the middle of some format you didn't mean to
> be in.

There are mainly three ways a piece of software can become
popular -- 1) its predecessor is popular, like DOS 2.x, DOS 3.x, DOS 4.x and
so on; 2) put on a big publicity campaign, like Windows 3.0;
3) is really the best!  Since WordPerfect 4.2 (the predecessor to 5.0 and 5.1)
was not the most popular in its time (Wordstar was), and WordPerfect Corp did
not put out a big publicity campaign (as far as I know), then its got
to be really good.  

Sorry for sayin this, but you have problem with the "stupid" embedded codes
because you are not careful.  I am not careful too sometimes and do
some damage to my document, but that is not the fault of the word processor,
it is my own.  In fact, the more "complicated" a word processor is, 
the more powerful it is.  And WP 5.1 is extremely powerful.  

Your reason for choosing Word over WP is not WP's fault, its yours.
The few reasons I can fault a word processor is if it does not
provide certain features even if I would go the mile to execute it.
So far, I have no such complaint with Word Perfect, though I 
have not delibrately try to find fault with it. 

p.s. I have spent hundreds of hours on WP, working with columns and
     overlapping graphic images, etc.  One document I am working on now
     is 1.1MB!