My main complaint about FullWrite is that it takes up a lot of memory - up to 1,124 kilobytes - and most Macintoshes have only 1,024 kilobytes, or one megabyte, of memory. Both programs performed well when tested on a Macintosh II, but that machine computes four times faster than an SE. As with most computer software, the delays are subtle, but still noticeable when using a standard Macintosh SE. WordPerfect and FullWrite are ambitious programs, but like luxury limousines, they can be a bit sluggish at times. However, after testing all three (using both a standard Mac SE and a souped-up Mac II), I'm going to stick with Word, at least for the time being. Their Macintosh word processing offerings arguably are richer in features than Microsoft Word. WordPerfect publishes for IBM PC and compatibles, while Ashton-Tate dominates the IBM PC database market with dBase III. released WordPerfect for the Macintosh, which retails for $399, and then Ashton-Tate weighed in with FullWrite Professional, a $395 program.īoth companies have a great deal of clout. It offers a spell checker, the ability to edit several documents at a time and a reasonable amount of control over the appearance of a document.īut now two more companies are in the market. Until recently, hot-selling Microsoft Word was the only full-featured word processing program for the Apple Macintosh.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |