🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <15680@ut-emx.UUCP>, chpf127@ut-emx (John W. Eaton) writes:
+---------------
| In article <8467@batcomputer.tn.cornell.edu> lacey@tcgould.tn.cornell.edu
| (John Lacey) writes:
| >> [...] Nevertheless, virtually all who work professionally will
| >> stick with the generally harder to use high end equipment
| 
| [presumably TeX|*roff, though I might not go so far as to say harder
| to use...]  
| 
| In article <1552@garcon.cso.uiuc.edu> mcclaren@herodotus.cs.uiuc.edu.UUCP
| (Tim McClarren) asks:
| > But then why is it that more and more I pick up a book, flip through
| > a couple of pages, and lo & behold, there it is right alongside the
| > copyright and Lib. of Congress info -- "This book written and
| > typeset with a Macintosh II and Microsoft Word" or some such?  I
| > dunno...maybe I read too much popular lit./media, but I've not seen
| > a whole lot of "This book written under vi, and typeset with
| > LaTeX/*roff on Bob & Jim's UNIX(c) box."
| 
| Well, because the people who write the books you've been reading
| aren't professionals :-) or you're just not looking at the right
| books :-).  
+---------------

Because troff and TeX are optimized for technical books, not for popular ones.
You'd pretty much have to invent your own macro packages to typeset a GFQ
(Generic Fantasy Quest) novel, or for "how-to" books, etc.

++Brandon
-- 
  Brandon S. Allbery @ telotech, inc.   (I do not speak for telotech.  Ever.)
*This article may only be redistributed if all articles listed in the header's*
*  References: field, and all articles listing this one in their References:  *
*		       fields, are also redistributed.			      *