🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <P0eZJ1w161w@wf-aus.cactus.org> gustwick@wf-aus.cactus.org (Bob Gustwick   ) writes:
>spage@cup.portal.com (S spage Page) writes:
>
>> WfW is very close to Macintosh Word (except for its macro language).  Both
>> WfW and Ami Pro can save in RTF (Rich Text Format).
>except that Word for Mac is more compatible w/ Word 5.0 than
>WFW is w/ Word 5.0.

This matches my experience, as I use WordMac at work and Word 5.0 at home,
and have converted over to WfW. 

>WFW and Word 5.0 are not compatible.  even on simple documents
>WFW will paginate differently than WFW...  on more complex
>documents, especially w/ style sheets, WFW may produce output that
>not only is not similar to Word 5.0 output, but is completely
>unrecognizable.

You need to move/adapt the style sheets to WFW.  Without the
style sheets, of course, output can be drastically different.  This is not
a problem with WfW or an incompatibility at the document level.  There is
a lot of power in style sheets, just like in macros, and everything has
to be moved to the new system.  I've had no real problems.

>>hard disk and you'd like to view/print them in the future, be sure
>not to throw away word 5.0.  w/o word 5.0, your old documents
>will be useless.

Nah, too strong a conclusion and certainly not true.  For a power user
who has used every last trick of the system moving to a new system is
always tough.  I've tossed my Word 5.0 to save the space, have a couple
hundred documents with a few involved style sheets, and have never once
considered reloading Word 5.0 to print or update an old document.  Doing
adaption and making adjustments help one to learn the new system.  A
new system *always* results in some temporary loss of productivity as
an individual adapts.  Maybe one day the system will adapt to the
individual.

Bruce