[X4U] fellow luddites?

[keith_w]

nk wrote:
> Mac Write is a perfect example of an application which, (IMHO) was 
> already completely "there" in the sense that it beautifully and 
> completely fulfilled its mission (as a word processor).  I wish they'd 
> kept MW II around and had a version that ran on OS X, just like the 
> MacWrite II of c.1993.

I'll leave the rest of the message intact, for info, but...
you might be interested to know another list exits that recognizes the 
frustration of we "oldsters" in the game, and what we do with word 
processing on the Mac.

See: emailman-software-wordproc-mac at emailman.newsgrouphosting.com

This group/list got a decent start, but it hasn't been sustained.
The gent who started it is a well known person in the industry, Randy 
Singer, author of The Macintosh Bible (4th, 5th and 6th editions).
He (and I) agree with your basic objections.

We could use some fresh blood on the list!

BTW. we both like MS Word 5.1a, but it's not compatible with OSX, and 
quite likely it never WILL be...

Good luck!

keith whaley

> I've had them all, word processors, but never got down to business more 
> effectively and with the least amount of tinkering and futzing around as 
> with Mac Write II. I remember thinking, 'this is really the only wp I'll 
> personally ever need.' To me, perfect the way it WAS.
> 
> then, suddenly, word processors started having voice annotations, or the 
> ability to play quicktime movies, to draw, or create databases, or make 
> chocolate parfaits, or whatever.
> 
> they got more expensive, more tricky to use, had stiffer hardware 
> requirements and OS requirements, more RAM..remember how people howled 
> right around Word 6 or so?
> 
> yet, if the basic job was typing, formatting text, using styles, etc., 
> none of them really did any better than Mac Write II, and all of them 
> required more complexity and expense just to have them.
> 
> I have gone from a pair of Dual 2Ghz G5's  stuffed with RAM to a pair of 
> Mac Minis stuffed with RAM, and although a bit slower, not really less 
> capable. Yeah, the prevailing wisdom is that the Mac Mini isn't a "real" 
> computer. My experience says otherwise.
> 
> I guess I'll just have to see how things morph over the next 5 years or 
> more. Given the life expectancy of Macs, I might have to chime in then 
> and let ya know how my films and 3D animations are coming along.
> 
> nk


> On Nov 17, 2006, at 2:06 AM, Geoffrey Loeffler wrote:
> 
>> I wrote a legal brief on a Mac 512 in MacWrite, how could I possibly  
>> have done it any faster on the most powerful computer today. I can 
>> only type so fast. That was system 6 and it worked just fine.