Seeing this a bit late, but I wonder how you would feel about such a graphic
if it were a captioned image intended to be viewed in the preceding
paragraph? I've found problems like yours pretty easy to overcome in Word
without Word Perfect assuming it knows what I want to do.
As far as Word Perfect: I remember an arrogant, expensive, difficult to
learn word processing package whose files could not be incorporated into any
other application without considerable reworking. Only when the threat of
Microsoft Word and its intuitive approach began to strongly appeal to the
multitudes of frustrated users is when Word Perfect decided to change its
corporate tune! As a result of its over-indulgence in itself, it lost the
market, as well as Lotus and PageMaker, and maybe some other similarly
un-attuned apps.
For the record, I abandoned WP-5 for a more intuitive, but admittedly less
delivering WordStar 5. When MS Word improved, version by version, I thanked
God for free enterprise and a suite of apps that was intuitive in approach
and more affordable for the common user. There are Microsoft haters who
will dig and dig and dig just to find the one peeve that they can use to
justify an unreasonable claim.
and I am,
Tim,
a common user of apps
"dennis" wrote in message
...
I've read this whole thread. And I agree with Harlan! But I have a
warning,
and a thought to pass on:
Warning: discussing the merits, pitfalls, etc of various vendors software
is
like arguing about politics or religion. No one changes there mind, few
are
objective, and some become fanatical or violent.
Thought: I agree that Word in inferior to WordPerfect (indeed, I don't
think
that WordXP, on the whole, is yet up to WordPerfect 6.1, which is about 8?
years old). That being said, one must remember that the paradigm which
with
Microsoft works is: To manufacture and market software to make money,
where,
I believe, WordPerfect had the attitude: Make a good product and you will
make money (hence the difference?)
My two cents worth,
Cheers,
Dennis
"Harlan Messinger" wrote:
I just sent the following to the MS wish list about a pet peeve of mine.
What do you all think about this flaw?
Over 15 years ago WordPerfect was smart enough to move an image or other
object to the top of the next page if the remainder of the current page
wasn't big enough to hold it--and to fill the remainder of the current
page
with the text that had been typed in after the image. It was smart
enough to
adjust references to these objects automatically: If the paragraph
before
the image said "See the picture {below}", where {below} indicates a
reference code, then when the image moved to the next page, {below}
would be
changed automatically to {on page X}. As text was added or deleted, the
reflowing occurred automatically, so that if the image once again could
fit
directly where it had been inserted by the user, it would.
Why in the world, in all this time, has Microsoft not seen fit to do
this
with Word? Does Microsoft really think it's attractive that when an
image
two-thirds of a page high flows to the next page, it should leave a
quarter-page or half-page empty gap on the page before it? Or does
Microsoft
think its users don't like word processing to be *too* automatic, that
we
like manually moving our images around every time we revise our
documents?
--
Harlan Messinger
Remove the first dot from my e-mail address.
Veuillez ๔ter le premier point de mon adresse de courriel.
|