Path: csiph.com!x330-a1.tempe.blueboxinc.net!feeder1.hal-mli.net!nx02.iad01.newshosting.com!newshosting.com!69.16.185.11.MISMATCH!npeer01.iad.highwinds-media.com!news.highwinds-media.com!feed-me.highwinds-media.com!postnews.google.com!hd10g2000vbb.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail From: John Wallace Newsgroups: comp.sys.dec,comp.os.vms Subject: Re: Software used for diagrams in DEC documentation Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2011 15:29:04 -0700 (PDT) Organization: http://groups.google.com Lines: 43 Message-ID: <81c7920e-ae2e-421a-8484-e150393a723f@hd10g2000vbb.googlegroups.com> References: <2c2dna-E5v7FHjDQnZ2dnUVZ_s-dnZ2d@earthlink.com> <915q9tF64kU1@mid.individual.net> NNTP-Posting-Host: 80.229.247.139 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Trace: posting.google.com 1303252144 20400 127.0.0.1 (19 Apr 2011 22:29:04 GMT) X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2011 22:29:04 +0000 (UTC) Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com Injection-Info: hd10g2000vbb.googlegroups.com; posting-host=80.229.247.139; posting-account=LoTgDQkAAADTKXJ587vuIocn0MiURp6p User-Agent: G2/1.0 X-HTTP-UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-GB; rv:1.9.2.16) Gecko/20110319 Firefox/3.6.16 (.NET CLR 3.5.30729),gzip(gfe) Xref: x330-a1.tempe.blueboxinc.net comp.sys.dec:256 comp.os.vms:2232 On Apr 19, 10:27=A0pm, ChrisQ wrote: > urbancamo wrote: > > > Microsoft Word is quite possibly the worst piece of software I've ever > > used (and I've used a good few versions now!) - bugs introduced early > > on have to be treated as features to maintain compatibility over > > sanity. > > > Mark. > > Like much modern packaged software, word probably satisfies and > frustrates users to an equal degree, Providing you don't want to do > anything too clever, it gets the job done, but suffers from excess > featuritis, when all you want to do is write a letter. I use an older > pre uSoft version of Visio and other packages for drawing and they too > get the job done without too much drama. We might all bemoan the quality > of old, but the world has moved on and present day graphics intensive > applications would be unusable on older dec hardware. Sad fact, but true. > > I was disappointed by the fact that DecWrite was never ported to other > os's. An old copy that I used on microvax seemed quite good, if a little > prosaic and slow in it's user interface. A good application trying to > escape, was the impression. It could have been a valid competitor to > uSoft with more development, especially with all the effort going into > Alpha at the time. There, dec had a machine fast enough to run it... > > Regards, > > Chris Never ported to what other OSes? It was available for VMS, Unix (Ultrix, OSF/1->Tru64), Windows... feel free to find the SPDs and see for yourself. Of course, it's entirely understandable if you didn't actually know this, as making customers aware of what was available wasn't always a core DEC competency, and there was also a corporate reluctance to deploy workstations internally for the then-newfangled Compound Document Architecture stuff like DECwrite, not to mention tools like DECdecision etc (and definitely not to mention DECpresent). The UK's (and later European) DECdirect catalogues (and teams) were marvellous tools in this respect - a catalogue that kept customers informed, and a mechanism to order things, often at sensible prices.