TMG-L Archives

Archiver > TMG > 2011-10 > 1318016947


From: Rick Van Dusen <>
Subject: Re: [TMG] exhibit gallery
Date: Fri, 07 Oct 2011 12:49:07 -0700
References: <283DAF3E-9B8A-4523-893C-3399350AB108@comcast.net><SNT107-DS20987304A38A42E3D42394D8FE0@phx.gbl>
In-Reply-To: <SNT107-DS20987304A38A42E3D42394D8FE0@phx.gbl>


There used to be a real distinction between "word processing" and "page
layout" software, until the word processors gained proficiency at page
layout.

I used Lotus AmiPro (c1992) for many years, until being forced to
"upgrade"* to Lotus WordPro (which IMO was crippled by comparison as
they tried to make it more "Word-like"). AmiPro could really do some
page-like functions (its hardcopy manual was composed entirely in
AmiPro), and it had features and functionality that Word still didn't
have as late as 2003.

(end of nostalgia/mini-rant)

My daughter has had pretty good experience with MS Publisher, which
supports Pat's comments.


---------------
* AmiPro, being a Win 3.0 program, didn't know how to talk to a USB
printer (in Win98). Win2000 solved that problem, but by then I'd been
migrated for some time.




Pat Carson wrote:
> In recent times I have used a page layout program with great success for
> this sort of thing. M$ Office usually has Publisher included or Adobe's
> Pagemaker is good too. I don't see any equivalent with OO. But the beauty of
> page layout programs is that YOU place the various elements where YOU want
> them - and they stay there! Word, in particular, is an absolute menace in
> its inability to hold the placing/formatting information for images - which
> then leap about or disappear off the page, never to be found again (unless
> you can find the placeholder and catch them there!). Another example of M$
> trying to 'think' for us ... <degenerates into rant, we are not stupid, etc>
> ... ;-)
>
> Alternatively, I remember WordPerect as being fairly reasonable in this
> respect, but I haven't used this s/w in some time.
>
> Pat

This thread: