I found that it helps if you think of a Word document as you would HTML and CSS.
My experience is similar. I found myself wanting to use Dreamweaver as a word processor, because I like the CSS interface. HTML/CSS is kind of clumsy for business docs; but thinking about page markup put me on the trail of Word styles.
If I remember correct, WP 6.0 was the version with WYSIWYG that drove me away from WordPerfect.
Yeah, me too.
WP 5.1 didn't literally have everything I need, as discussed elsewhere in this thread. But I still have a soft spot for certain archaic programs... but it sure was the schiznitz, back in the day.
If you're using styles (which you should be, I don't care what you think is a good exception to this statement because it's not a good exception), Reveal Formatting in Word gives a lot of the same functionality.
Useful -- thanks.
I've been dabbling with styles in Word lately, thinking it would be a sensible thing to do. But I hadn't noticed Reveal Formatting.
Especially because Reveal Codes was so much faster for fixing formatting problems than Word to this day.
Yes! You have hit the nail square on the head, my friend! Reveal Codes, that's what I immediately and sorely missed when my then-employer switched from WordPerfect to Word!
You're right -- I've succumbed to maudlin sentimentality about archaic software.
You wouldn't happen to have any spare GOTO statements, would you? I haven't seen mine for decades but I'm feeling kind of homesick for the good old days....
I wasn't complaining -- I was (worse yet) sighing wistfully...
But seriously: thanks, I hadn't actually thought of installing it. But it might be a kick, for old time's sake. (Hell, I'm still fond of BattleZone, no matter how good the Quakes and Half-Lifes get.) And thanks for posting that link.
... the lack of copy-and paste between apps, an OS-based printer driver system, etc... makes it just that much more of an effort to use...
Well, yeah, that's all true. And I'd quickly run into these shortcomings and get fed up, if I spent much time reviving an archaic program.
"In 1949 some friends and I came upon a noteworthy news item in Nature, a magazine of the Academy of Sciences. It reported in tiny type that in the course of excavations on the Kolyma River a subterranean ice lens had been discovered which was actually a frozen stream-and in it were found frozen specimens of prehistoric fauna some tens of thousands of years old. Whether fish or salamander, these were preserved in so fresh a state, the scientific correspondent reported, that those present immediately broke open the ice encasing the specimens and devoured them with relish on the spot."
- Aleksandr I. Solzhenitsyn, The Gulag Arachipelago
Back around 2001, I got an email from a researcher (in Manitoba, if memory serves me) who was working with hardware blocks and a modified Quake engine.
When the blocks were plugged together, internal microcontrollers reported the block configuration back to the master circuit, which translated the block configuration into the Quake engine.
Result: user assembles blocks, Quake displays the block configuration.
The hope was that the system could help with rehabilitation of stroke victims. I don't know the outcome of the project, but I remember that it was a serious university-level program.
I regret that I lost the name and email address of the guy who contacted me. If you're him, or know him, please get in touch -- I'd like to follow up.
President Gerald Ford issued a Presidential directive (October 1976) to indefinitely suspend the commercial reprocessing and recycling of plutonium in the U.S. This was confirmed by President Jimmy Carter in 1977. Link.
National security requires confidence in the OS of the national infrastructure. This comment is very true:
Why any country would voluntarily base their national security on imported, closed-source, non-free software is beyond my reasoning.
This comment, not so true:
If a country wants to control its infrastructure, it must use free software. Same goes for us computers users, too, of course, but the stakes are much higher for a sovereign nation.
Why must the software be free? The question is not "free" versus "unfree". The question is, can the Russians trust their OS?
Certainly they can't trust Windows -- or any other closed foreign OS.
I assume it's in the Russian interest to develop their own closed-source domestic OS. How else can the silovoki hide their backdoors in the national infrastructure?
Next up - Design! Woot, this bit is fun. So we crank up Rose or whatever and get to work. But when do we stop? Well again, that's tough. Because I don't know about you but I can design forever, getting better and better, more and more modular, more and more generic, until the whole thing has flipped itself inside out. So we stop when it's "good enough" - according to who?
Very true!
According to... whoever makes the decision. Somebody has to make the decision, and stand by it. That somebody should be someone who knows:
(a) what they're talking about, and
(b) is willing and able to take the responsibility for deciding when "good enough" is "good enough."
And there's the rub: when is good enough good enough??
In my experience, this is not a technical question -- there's usually no final answer, no ultimate and complete answer. (Not in a project more complex than "Hello World", anyway.)
"Good enough" is more of an administrative question (how much "good enough" can we afford?... or, alternately, how much "not good enough" can we not afford?)
Or maybe (if we're lucky) it's an artistic question (this "good enough" is "beautiful enough").
You can not even imaging the scale of the cloning activity.
How dare you tell me what I can't imagine! I'll be the judge of what I can't imagine.
I think Han Solo put it well:
Luke: She's rich.
Han Solo: [interested] Rich?
Luke: Rich, powerful. Listen, if you were to rescue her, the reward would be...
Han Solo: What?
Luke: Well, more wealth than you can imagine!
Han Solo: I don't know, I can imagine quite a bit.
This is more of a sign of the break down in community vs. individualistic values than a sign of income disparities.
At first glance, I agree with you.
On reflection -- thinking like an anthropologist, here -- I wonder if the breakdown of community values into individualistic values tends to parallel the breakdown from richer to poorer.
Reasoning: members of a community are more likely to create and accumulate wealth than loners. I'm speaking here of the long run (discounting short-run loner wealth, e.g. lottery, bank robbery, etc.).
Seen in this light, the breakdown of community values into lone wolf values would be accompanied by reduced accumulation of wealth.
This is speculation based on intuition; I have no evidence or authorities to back this up. I should mention that I'm not an anthropologist, although anthropology does run in the family.
I'm thinking (extreme analogy here) of how Peter Farb, in his excellent Man's Rise to Civilization, explains the near-universal taboo on incest. In brief, Farb argues that cultures which permit incest tend to be endogamous (marrying within the group), whereas the incest taboo necessitates exogamy (marrying outside the group). Exogamous cultures are better able to generate and accumulate wealth, therefore they out-compete endogamous cultures; in time, endogamous cultures disappear (or sink into an ugly criminal underground).
I know this. I was just saying that's the "common knowledge".
Sorry, I missed the irony in your post.
Maybe the zinc penny isn't common knowledge, I dunno. I assumed that it is (I read about it back in the eighties).
But I haven't read any surveys, haven't done or read any research on the subject. (Furthermore, I'm inclined to treat surveys with cautious skepticism.)
All I've really got to go on is my own intuition... which I've proven to my own satisfaction is (a) sometimes accurate, (b) sometimes inaccurate, (c) sometimes wildly inaccurate.
Slashdot Mirror
Damn you Corel for destroying a perfectly good and lean product.
Yeah, WP 5.1 was a good lean product, although I try to cut Corel some slack because they're the scrappy underdog.
I found that it helps if you think of a Word document as you would HTML and CSS.
My experience is similar. I found myself wanting to use Dreamweaver as a word processor, because I like the CSS interface. HTML/CSS is kind of clumsy for business docs; but thinking about page markup put me on the trail of Word styles.
If I remember correct, WP 6.0 was the version with WYSIWYG that drove me away from WordPerfect.
Yeah, me too.
WP 5.1 didn't literally have everything I need, as discussed elsewhere in this thread. But I still have a soft spot for certain archaic programs ... but it sure was the schiznitz, back in the day.
If you're using styles (which you should be, I don't care what you think is a good exception to this statement because it's not a good exception), Reveal Formatting in Word gives a lot of the same functionality.
Useful -- thanks.
I've been dabbling with styles in Word lately, thinking it would be a sensible thing to do. But I hadn't noticed Reveal Formatting.
" ... WP was gross overkill for just about everyone ... "
Point well taken: even WP 5.1 had plenty of features and functions (a less charitable critic might say "bloat") of no interest to me.
Word has had a style inspector since Office 2003 (or possibly Office XP).
Thx!
Especially because Reveal Codes was so much faster for fixing formatting problems than Word to this day.
Yes! You have hit the nail square on the head, my friend! Reveal Codes, that's what I immediately and sorely missed when my then-employer switched from WordPerfect to Word!
You're right -- I've succumbed to maudlin sentimentality about archaic software.
You wouldn't happen to have any spare GOTO statements, would you? I haven't seen mine for decades but I'm feeling kind of homesick for the good old days ....
So install it and quit complaining.
I wasn't complaining -- I was (worse yet) sighing wistfully ...
But seriously: thanks, I hadn't actually thought of installing it. But it might be a kick, for old time's sake. (Hell, I'm still fond of BattleZone, no matter how good the Quakes and Half-Lifes get.) And thanks for posting that link.
Well, yeah, that's all true. And I'd quickly run into these shortcomings and get fed up, if I spent much time reviving an archaic program.
Still, back in the day, it was the schiznitz.
I could have been happy using WordPerfect 5.1 for the rest of my life -- it did everything I need a word processor to do.
"In 1949 some friends and I came upon a noteworthy news item in Nature, a magazine of the Academy of Sciences. It reported in tiny type that in the course of excavations on the Kolyma River a subterranean ice lens had been discovered which was actually a frozen stream-and in it were found frozen specimens of prehistoric fauna some tens of thousands of years old. Whether fish or salamander, these were preserved in so fresh a state, the scientific correspondent reported, that those present immediately broke open the ice encasing the specimens and devoured them with relish on the spot."
- Aleksandr I. Solzhenitsyn, The Gulag Arachipelago
Link
Made me laugh! Mod parent up!
Back around 2001, I got an email from a researcher (in Manitoba, if memory serves me) who was working with hardware blocks and a modified Quake engine.
When the blocks were plugged together, internal microcontrollers reported the block configuration back to the master circuit, which translated the block configuration into the Quake engine.
Result: user assembles blocks, Quake displays the block configuration.
The hope was that the system could help with rehabilitation of stroke victims. I don't know the outcome of the project, but I remember that it was a serious university-level program.
I regret that I lost the name and email address of the guy who contacted me. If you're him, or know him, please get in touch -- I'd like to follow up.
President Gerald Ford issued a Presidential directive (October 1976) to indefinitely suspend the commercial reprocessing and recycling of plutonium in the U.S. This was confirmed by President Jimmy Carter in 1977. Link.
If I remember correctly, during the first round, Tice provided technical docs for the machine doing the tapping.
I suppose we're all at risk of "suicide", if we piss off the wrong people ....
Why any country would voluntarily base their national security on imported, closed-source, non-free software is beyond my reasoning.
This comment, not so true:
If a country wants to control its infrastructure, it must use free software. Same goes for us computers users, too, of course, but the stakes are much higher for a sovereign nation.
Why must the software be free? The question is not "free" versus "unfree". The question is, can the Russians trust their OS?
Certainly they can't trust Windows -- or any other closed foreign OS.
I assume it's in the Russian interest to develop their own closed-source domestic OS. How else can the silovoki hide their backdoors in the national infrastructure?
At least we've still got a physical human being for a President.
Next step, the Virtual President. Sims expansion pack, anyone?
Next up - Design! Woot, this bit is fun. So we crank up Rose or whatever and get to work. But when do we stop? Well again, that's tough. Because I don't know about you but I can design forever, getting better and better, more and more modular, more and more generic, until the whole thing has flipped itself inside out. So we stop when it's "good enough" - according to who?
Very true!
According to ... whoever makes the decision. Somebody has to make the decision, and stand by it. That somebody should be someone who knows:
(a) what they're talking about, and
(b) is willing and able to take the responsibility for deciding when "good enough" is "good enough."
And there's the rub: when is good enough good enough??
In my experience, this is not a technical question -- there's usually no final answer, no ultimate and complete answer. (Not in a project more complex than "Hello World", anyway.)
"Good enough" is more of an administrative question (how much "good enough" can we afford? ... or, alternately, how much "not good enough" can we not afford?)
Or maybe (if we're lucky) it's an artistic question (this "good enough" is "beautiful enough").
You can not even imaging the scale of the cloning activity.
How dare you tell me what I can't imagine! I'll be the judge of what I can't imagine.
I think Han Solo put it well:
Luke: She's rich.
Han Solo: [interested] Rich?
Luke: Rich, powerful. Listen, if you were to rescue her, the reward would be...
Han Solo: What?
Luke: Well, more wealth than you can imagine!
Han Solo: I don't know, I can imagine quite a bit.
This is more of a sign of the break down in community vs. individualistic values than a sign of income disparities.
At first glance, I agree with you.
On reflection -- thinking like an anthropologist, here -- I wonder if the breakdown of community values into individualistic values tends to parallel the breakdown from richer to poorer.
Reasoning: members of a community are more likely to create and accumulate wealth than loners. I'm speaking here of the long run (discounting short-run loner wealth, e.g. lottery, bank robbery, etc.).
Seen in this light, the breakdown of community values into lone wolf values would be accompanied by reduced accumulation of wealth.
This is speculation based on intuition; I have no evidence or authorities to back this up. I should mention that I'm not an anthropologist, although anthropology does run in the family.
I'm thinking (extreme analogy here) of how Peter Farb, in his excellent Man's Rise to Civilization, explains the near-universal taboo on incest. In brief, Farb argues that cultures which permit incest tend to be endogamous (marrying within the group), whereas the incest taboo necessitates exogamy (marrying outside the group). Exogamous cultures are better able to generate and accumulate wealth, therefore they out-compete endogamous cultures; in time, endogamous cultures disappear (or sink into an ugly criminal underground).
By in large a majority of the American people can not answer the following questions ...
I take your point. I'm told that there are people who are proud that they're not educated. (I haven't met them, but I have it on good authority.)
I know this. I was just saying that's the "common knowledge".
... which I've proven to my own satisfaction is (a) sometimes accurate, (b) sometimes inaccurate, (c) sometimes wildly inaccurate.
Sorry, I missed the irony in your post.
Maybe the zinc penny isn't common knowledge, I dunno. I assumed that it is (I read about it back in the eighties).
But I haven't read any surveys, haven't done or read any research on the subject. (Furthermore, I'm inclined to treat surveys with cautious skepticism.)
All I've really got to go on is my own intuition
(Or maybe I'm just not nuts enough yet. Yikes.)
"You will be. You will be."
- Yoda
I mean hea, our pennies are made of [copper] right?
Not really. Since 1982, US pennies have been 97.5% zinc, with a copper coating.