Date: Fri, 10 Jun 2005 10:19:52 -0400
From: "Michael Walsh" <MJW at press.jhu.edu>
To: <WSFAlist at WSFA.org>
Subject: [WSFA] Word processors, was Better than politics!

> kfl at KeithLynch.net 6/9/2005 9:43:21 PM >>>

snippage

>
>Fortunately, I'm a fast learner.  Editing in Word isn't much harder
>than holding all one's coversations in Pig Latin, or writing
backwards
>with one's non-dominant hand, or riding a bicycle on slick ice.  At
>least not once I figured out how to get it to display light text on a
>dark bacground rather than the default eye-hurting inverse video that
>was like trying to spend all day reading text on a lit fluorescent
bulb.

First wordprocessor I used was Scripsit, then Wordstar (I still quite
often use control keys for some WP commands), then an odd - but neat -
package called Samna* (be around 1984 or so).  Since 1988 it's been
Wordperfect here at Hopkins.  When the last 40 Windows 95 machines were
"retired" here (like mine) everyone was also "upgraded" to Word, with WP
suppose to go away...

"You will pry WP from my cold dead hands..."  Turns out our publicist -
who has been here for 20 years - has sooooooo many WP macros, that she
has kept WP on her machine.  I also kept WP, not that I have any macros,
but I really, really didn't want to deal with another "learning
experience."

For me, WP is just a fancy typewriter (remember those?  They're great
for filling out forms in triplicate or creating a label or two...).  I
could learn Word if needed, but why bother?  Which I suspect is the
reaction most of us have regarding whatever wordprocessor one is using;
it's comfortable, like an old shoe.

& as for being able to change the display text/background.... well,
certainly there must be some Word experts on this list who can assist
you.

mjw

*Samna was acquired, around 1990, by Lotus.  The computer company I was
working at the time (and that's another story...) for was busily
converting their CP/M business software to DOS.