Re: Word/Weird: inconsistency?

[Peter <pnewman1 -at- home -dot- com>]

"Hart, Geoff" wrote:
> 
> Peter called me on my statement that "Most of us have a love/hate
> relationship with the software... part of the problem is that Word is such a
> fine tool for writing, and it's deeply frustrating to encounter all the
> glitches that periodically rise up and bite us". <<I'm baffled by your
> posting. It is logically inconsistent to say Word is a fine tool for
> writing, but if you use it you will encounter glitchesand frustrations.>>
> 
> "Do I contradict myself? Very well, then I contradict myself. I am vast, and
> contain multitudes." (Or something like that... some day I'll hunt down the
> actual quote.)
> 
> Actually, Peter, there's no contradiction whatsoever. Nothing's perfect, and
> claiming that liking something despite its imperfections is inconsistent is
> <ahem> logically inconsistent with reality. Based on my experience to date,
> Word is far nearer to that elusive ideal than WordPerfect, at least from my
> own very subjective viewpoint of finding myself far more productive using
> it. (And that's speaking as someone who only broke down and bought Word for
> my Mac after close to 10 years of using WP.)
> 

For a short document Word is OK. Try a long document, (20-35 pages,)
with cross referencing, tables, numbered paragraphs in multiple styles,
three levels of tables of authorities and an index. Word will drive you
nuts. Just my NVHO.



-- 
Peter

Arguing with an engineer is like mud wrestling with a pig.
You soon realize they both enjoy it.