'Emacs style' delete line shortcut (CTRL/U) doesn't work correctly in Firefox

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
48 messages Options
123
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: 'Emacs style' delete line shortcut (CTRL/U) doesn't work correctly in Firefox

Chris Green
On Thu, Oct 11, 2018 at 11:26:57PM +0200, Liam Proven wrote:
> [2]
>
> I don't live in a text editor. I live in about half a dozen apps,
> constantly switching. I also switch between 3 or 4 computers and OSes
> every day. So the comments about how the editor is central are
> incorrect.
>
Neither do I but using the same editor to manage text in every
application is a big advantage IMHO.  I often get very cross when
trying to change some text somewhere and I can't use my 'standard'
(well, built into my fingers) to do it.

--
Chris Green

--
ubuntu-users mailing list
[hidden email]
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-users
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: 'Emacs style' delete line shortcut (CTRL/U) doesn't work correctly in Firefox

Chris Green
In reply to this post by Liam Proven
On Thu, Oct 11, 2018 at 11:16:11PM +0200, Liam Proven wrote:

> On Thu, 11 Oct 2018 at 21:25, MR ZenWiz <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > >
> > A lot of these are also available in XFCE4 - I use Xubuntu almost
> > exclusively, and I routinely use the keyboard to do such things.
>
> I used XFCE at work, after evaluating and discarding the then-current
> versions of GNOME, KDE, LXDE, LXQt (and this year, Cinnamon).
>
> At home I'm still on Unity. I think I'll have to reformat and switch to Xubuntu.
>
I 'found' XFCE pretty early on in my Linux use and have stayed with it
ever since.  It simply gets in the way less.

--
Chris Green

--
ubuntu-users mailing list
[hidden email]
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-users
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: 'Emacs style' delete line shortcut (CTRL/U) doesn't work correctly in Firefox

Liam Proven
In reply to this post by Chris Green
On Fri, 12 Oct 2018 at 11:37, Chris Green <[hidden email]> wrote:

> >
> Neither do I but using the same editor to manage text in every
> application is a big advantage IMHO.  I often get very cross when
> trying to change some text somewhere and I can't use my 'standard'
> (well, built into my fingers) to do it.

Sort of my point.

The basic CUA editor is embedded into every text field in every GUI
app in the world. Attach a hardware keyboard and it even works on iOS,
Android etc.

So I want a desktop editor that works the same as that.

The battle is over. The Emacs and Vi UIs may be better in some
measurable way -- I don't think they are, but I'm giving the benefit
of the doubt -- but they are out of step with basically *all other
user-interactive software in the world*.

Both could be modernised. CREAM looks like a pretty good update of Vi
- http://cream.sourceforge.net/

ErgoEmacs is a brave attempt to update Emacs - http://ergoemacs.org/

AquaMacs does it a different way, layering a Mac OS X GUI _on top of_
the largely-unmodified Emacs one -- http://aquamacs.org/

But making Vi fully CUA-compliant means it's not Vi any more, because
the Vi UI model is profoundly different.

Emacs, not so much. They could do it. But there's a lot of hostility
and resistance, and I don't really understand why.


--
Liam Proven - Profile: https://about.me/liamproven
Email: [hidden email] - Google Mail/Hangouts/Plus: [hidden email]
Twitter/Facebook/Flickr: lproven - Skype/LinkedIn: liamproven
UK: +44 7939-087884 - ČR (+ WhatsApp/Telegram/Signal): +420 702 829 053

--
ubuntu-users mailing list
[hidden email]
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-users
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: 'Emacs style' delete line shortcut (CTRL/U) doesn't work correctly in Firefox

Chris Green
On Fri, Oct 12, 2018 at 11:49:15AM +0200, Liam Proven wrote:

> On Fri, 12 Oct 2018 at 11:37, Chris Green <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> > >
> > Neither do I but using the same editor to manage text in every
> > application is a big advantage IMHO.  I often get very cross when
> > trying to change some text somewhere and I can't use my 'standard'
> > (well, built into my fingers) to do it.
>
> Sort of my point.
>
> The basic CUA editor is embedded into every text field in every GUI
> app in the world. Attach a hardware keyboard and it even works on iOS,
> Android etc.
>
Yes, but it's nowhere near as useful/powerful as a proper editor. One
can't do multiple replacements or use regular expressions, etc.

I can, for example, do a multiple replacement using REs in a text box
in Firefox if I need to.

--
Chris Green

--
ubuntu-users mailing list
[hidden email]
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-users
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: 'Emacs style' delete line shortcut (CTRL/U) doesn't work correctly in Firefox

Liam Proven
On Fri, 12 Oct 2018 at 12:40, Chris Green <[hidden email]> wrote:
> >
> Yes, but it's nowhere near as useful/powerful as a proper editor. One
> can't do multiple replacements or use regular expressions, etc.
>
> I can, for example, do a multiple replacement using REs in a text box
> in Firefox if I need to.

True.

But it's there. It's what you get. It's all very well being able to
customise my own desktop, but I can't do that with my own tablet, or
phone, or a friend's PC I'm fixing, let alone if it's my job and it's
a client's machine or a remote server or something.

So IMHO it's more important to be skilled in using the standard editor
than one particular nonstandard tool which you can't rely on being
there.

On considering, this is closely comparable to the argument for using
Vi -- that it's the one editor that's always there on a *nix
machine...


--
Liam Proven - Profile: https://about.me/liamproven
Email: [hidden email] - Google Mail/Hangouts/Plus: [hidden email]
Twitter/Facebook/Flickr: lproven - Skype/LinkedIn: liamproven
UK: +44 7939-087884 - ČR (+ WhatsApp/Telegram/Signal): +420 702 829 053

--
ubuntu-users mailing list
[hidden email]
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-users
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: 'Emacs style' delete line shortcut (CTRL/U) doesn't work correctly in Firefox

Peter Flynn
In reply to this post by Liam Proven
On 12/10/18 08:42, Liam Proven wrote:
> I just started work early enough that I remember the hell of pre-CUA
> editors. My first job was before Windows 3.0, or OS/2 1.0, or Linux
> 0.01.

My first editor was TECO on a TeleType when I was a student in the 70s.
Grad students got to use 30cps video terminals :-)

> I worked with about a dozen different OSes. All had different UIs.

I only used 4-5 OSs but yes, the UIs were all different, some crazily so.

> Me too these days: mostly in Docbook XML, and a little AsciiDoc.
> I'd prefer something simple and straightforward, such as Notepad, to
> something powerful but arcane, such as Emacs or Vi.

Simple is good. One of the biggest puzzles is why -- after all these
years -- there is no decent XML editor usable by non-XML people. I did
some research on this a while back and found that all XML editors do
indeed implement all the functions an XML editor would be expected to
have, but they were often buried deep inside menus with naming that
users did not expect, or worked in an unexpected manner.

> This astonishes many of my colleagues.

I suspect your productivity is well in advance of theirs.

>> Interesting: i haven't seen that one. It's all off by default.
>
> Sadly, no, it isn't. By default, on Ubuntu, SUSE and macOS, it
> attempts to autocomplete what I think is eLisp and I have found no way
> at all to remove _all_ the "major modes".

Hmm. Odd. I just typed 'emacs mydoc' in a terminal, I get Emacs with
that as a new file in Fundamental mode, which is "not specialized for
anything in particular". No autocompletion that I can see, basically
just a glass typewriter. I'll check my .emacs, as I do use xml-mode on
*.xml files, but I get the same result if I move .emacs out of the way.

> I think it's the sort of thing Emacs-heads don't even notice. They
> press super-hyper-aleph-magic-F47-omega and turn it off (or something
> like that).

Could well be, although I suspect turning off all major modes would
result in no functionality at all.

> Me too. And none of my computers have a "meta" key, so anything that
> refers to it is straight out.

Historic holdover to placate the ego of the original author, alas.
> I have never in a 30y career needed an editor macro.

I'd never have been able to survive without them. I daily fix and patch
other peoples' broken data or text, so being able to automate repetitive
tasks is important, otherwise I'd have no fingers left at this stage :-)

> I used to *teach* writing macros, in at least 3 languages, but I've
> *never* needed one in my text editor.

Most of my users are probably unaware that they are using macros every
minute of the day, especially LaTeX users.

> 3 books so far, countless documents and articles.

Pretty much the same.

> You use CUA, every day.
> There is no contemporary OS that is not CUA and has not been this century.

A hallmark of its success is that users are unaware of it.

> Right. So I won't use anything that talks about "frames" and "buffers"
> when it means windows with files in. I won't use anything in which cut
> isn't Ctrl-X or at least Shift-Del. Why should I?

You shouldn't.

> Absolutely true. But text editors? There are literally _thousands_ and
> most are free.

Every CS student writes one at some stage, if only to find out why using
an existing one is a better move :-) But most corporate applications use
an embedded editor, often written by one of their "partners", and
frequently incompatible with the rest of the world — but they do tend at
least to obey Ctrl-C/X/V/Z/P/S. My experience of them is that they are
flaky, to be polite...
> Imagine you get a new machine. Before you import your emacs.el or
> whatever, its Emacs comes up with menus entitled File, Edit, View, ...
> Help.

Yes. I can get the bare-bones functionality by moving my .emacs file
somewhere else where Emacs won't see it.

> On File, ^O is "open file". ^N is "new file", ^P is print, ^S is save.

Bare-bones Emacs still uses its pre-CUA keystrokes for those functions,
but those functions are all there in menu. But I very rarely use mouse
and menus for common functions.

> Etc etc. No "buffers", no "frames". Same editor, but standardised UI.
> Once you import your settings, everything goes back to normal, of course.
> Would this bother you? Would it stop you using Emacs?

No, the Emacs people can do anything they want with the bare-bones
level, so long as I can have my xml-mode and other conveniences. AFAIK
they're not interested in making Emacs' bare-bones defaults align with
CUA, for historical, personal, and small-p-political reasons. I'm not
really interested in their petty little squabbles: I just use the
software because it works for what I need to do. Which, mutatis
mutandis, is basically the same reasoning that you use, and that Michael
Sperberg-McQueen used in his explanation...just with different results.

It would be interesting to apply the same logic to people's choice of
operating system interface. What do Linux UIs *not* do that other do do?

///Peter

///Peter

--
ubuntu-users mailing list
[hidden email]
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-users
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: 'Emacs style' delete line shortcut (CTRL/U) doesn't work correctly in Firefox

Peter Flynn
In reply to this post by Liam Proven
On 12/10/18 10:49, Liam Proven wrote:
> On Fri, 12 Oct 2018 at 11:37, Chris Green <[hidden email]> wrote:
[...]
> The battle is over. The Emacs and Vi UIs may be better in some
> measurable way -- I don't think they are, but I'm giving the benefit
> of the doubt -- but they are out of step with basically *all other
> user-interactive software in the world*.

Their authors' argument would be that they were there first, so it's CUA
that's out of step :-)

> Both could be modernised.

As you say, fixing Emacs is pretty straightforward.

> But making Vi fully CUA-compliant means it's not Vi any more, because
> the Vi UI model is profoundly different.

The dual-mode model of editing went out with TECO (read: "the ark"). The
idea is that you have to press a key before you can type anything, and
press another key before you can start editing what you've typed. This
made sense when using TECO to edit a magnetic tape, but it makes no
sense whatsoever in the modern world for normal text-editing purposes:
despite being actually a very small piece of excise, it's alien to the
generality of UIs, even Emacs.

> Emacs, not so much. They could do it. But there's a lot of hostility
> and resistance, and I don't really understand why.

There is a lot of personal pride and history invested in Emacs, largely
orbiting around the cult of its principal author, and the culture in
which it grew up. It certainly was groundbreaking, and it remains one of
the very few editors that can edit *anything* (for most practical
purposes), meaning it's at the bottom of the toolbag of most systems
engineers for use when everything else has failed. Once the cultus
disappears, it will change.

But to use it for editing plain, unmarked text is like using a Saturn V
launcher to rescue your drone stuck in a tree. On heavily marked text,
however, such as TEI, it's the only free system available with proper
controls; and its biggest use is for program code, which has a wholly
different set of requirements.

///Peter

--
ubuntu-users mailing list
[hidden email]
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-users
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: 'Emacs style' delete line shortcut (CTRL/U) doesn't work correctly in Firefox

Liam Proven
In reply to this post by Peter Flynn
On Fri, 12 Oct 2018 at 14:28, Peter Flynn <[hidden email]> wrote:

> My first editor was TECO on a TeleType when I was a student in the 70s.
> Grad students got to use 30cps video terminals :-)

*Tips hat* ;-)

> I only used 4-5 OSs but yes, the UIs were all different, some crazily so.

In work up to the late 1990s... let me think...

* MS-DOS, DR-DOS
* Windows 2, 3, 9x, NT 3.x & 4
* CP/M, Concurrent CP/M, Concurrent DOS
* SCO Xenix & UNIX
* Novell Netware 2, 3, 4, 5 (all quite different!)
* MacOS (classic)
* DEC OpenVMS
* IBM OS/2 1.x, 2, 3, 4
* IBM AIX
* Acorn MOS
* DR GEM
* Alpha Micro AMOS
* PDP-11 with RSTS/E
* IBM S/36 & OS/400
* SunOS & Solaris
* Several dedicated word-processors (QUME, IBM DisplayWriters, etc.)

And more in my hobbyist life, too: ST GEM, AmigaOS, Acorn RISC OS, etc.

More I've forgotten!

> Simple is good. One of the biggest puzzles is why -- after all these
> years -- there is no decent XML editor usable by non-XML people. I did
> some research on this a while back and found that all XML editors do
> indeed implement all the functions an XML editor would be expected to
> have, but they were often buried deep inside menus with naming that
> users did not expect, or worked in an unexpected manner.

Oh my heavens yes.

WordPerfect Corp could probably make a decent fist of it, if they tried.

> > This astonishes many of my colleagues.
>
> I suspect your productivity is well in advance of theirs.

:-D

> Hmm. Odd. I just typed 'emacs mydoc' in a terminal, I get Emacs with
> that as a new file in Fundamental mode, which is "not specialized for
> anything in particular". No autocompletion that I can see, basically
> just a glass typewriter. I'll check my .emacs, as I do use xml-mode on
> *.xml files, but I get the same result if I move .emacs out of the way.

Ahhhh... I never tried on an existing file, or a new blank file. I
just used the buffers there when I opened it to experiment.

> Could well be, although I suspect turning off all major modes would
> result in no functionality at all.

(!)

> Historic holdover to placate the ego of the original author, alas.

Aha! Yes, that makes sense...

> I'd never have been able to survive without them. I daily fix and patch
> other peoples' broken data or text, so being able to automate repetitive
> tasks is important, otherwise I'd have no fingers left at this stage :-)

Interesting. I don't use _editor_ macros for that. In the old days, I
wrote a bit of QuickBASIC or maybe a shell script.

But a good point I'd not really considered.

> Most of my users are probably unaware that they are using macros every
> minute of the day, especially LaTeX users.

True!

> A hallmark of its success is that users are unaware of it.

*Nod*

> Every CS student writes one at some stage, if only to find out why using
> an existing one is a better move :-) But most corporate applications use
> an embedded editor, often written by one of their "partners", and
> frequently incompatible with the rest of the world — but they do tend at
> least to obey Ctrl-C/X/V/Z/P/S. My experience of them is that they are
> flaky, to be polite...

Fair point. The rise of languages with embeddable pre-existing
controls has helped that a lot, in my world.

> Bare-bones Emacs still uses its pre-CUA keystrokes for those functions,
> but those functions are all there in menu. But I very rarely use mouse
> and menus for common functions.

Me either, which is why for the basics, I expect the keyboard commands
to work so I don't have to think about it. Once I'm in the menus
hunting for something, I expect a standard layout.

> No, the Emacs people can do anything they want with the bare-bones
> level, so long as I can have my xml-mode and other conveniences. AFAIK
> they're not interested in making Emacs' bare-bones defaults align with
> CUA, for historical, personal, and small-p-political reasons. I'm not
> really interested in their petty little squabbles: I just use the
> software because it works for what I need to do. Which, mutatis
> mutandis, is basically the same reasoning that you use, and that Michael
> Sperberg-McQueen used in his explanation...just with different results.

Hmmm. Good point. Historical tradition and ego... :-(

> It would be interesting to apply the same logic to people's choice of
> operating system interface. What do Linux UIs *not* do that other do do?

Hmmmm.

I think at the level of casual non-techies, using Macs or Windows,
it's mostly all one now.

And the real casual users are moving to tablets and phones, anyway.
PCs are becoming arcane.

This is one place ChromeOS is strong. Stronger than almost anyone's
noticed. It's a clever play by Google.

I have seen demos of the Canon Cat, in particular, which stands out as
a relatively recent -- early microcomputer era -- radically different,
in many ways radically _better_ UI.

Before that... Well, there was some truly radical stuff in the late
minicomputer era.

We have truly lost *so* much, it makes me almost weep.

Here's a wonderful ½hr 2013 presentation *pretending* to from 1973,
about what _should_ have been the next 40 years. Watch it, laugh, and
then mourn.

--
Liam Proven - Profile: https://about.me/liamproven
Email: [hidden email] - Google Mail/Hangouts/Plus: [hidden email]
Twitter/Facebook/Flickr: lproven - Skype/LinkedIn: liamproven
UK: +44 7939-087884 - ČR (+ WhatsApp/Telegram/Signal): +420 702 829 053

--
ubuntu-users mailing list
[hidden email]
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-users
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: 'Emacs style' delete line shortcut (CTRL/U) doesn't work correctly in Firefox

Liam Proven
In reply to this post by Peter Flynn
On Fri, 12 Oct 2018 at 14:42, Peter Flynn <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> Their authors' argument would be that they were there first, so it's CUA
> that's out of step :-)

Oh yes. Heard that many times. But really, the battle is over...

> As you say, fixing Emacs is pretty straightforward.

I wish I had the skills.

> The dual-mode model of editing went out with TECO (read: "the ark"). The
> idea is that you have to press a key before you can type anything, and
> press another key before you can start editing what you've typed. This
> made sense when using TECO to edit a magnetic tape, but it makes no
> sense whatsoever in the modern world for normal text-editing purposes:
> despite being actually a very small piece of excise, it's alien to the
> generality of UIs, even Emacs.

Agreed.

Mind you, CREAM is pretty impressive.

http://cream.sourceforge.net/

> There is a lot of personal pride and history invested in Emacs, largely
> orbiting around the cult of its principal author, and the culture in
> which it grew up. It certainly was groundbreaking, and it remains one of
> the very few editors that can edit *anything* (for most practical
> purposes), meaning it's at the bottom of the toolbag of most systems
> engineers for use when everything else has failed. Once the cultus
> disappears, it will change.

Hmmm. I wonder.

Borland's excellent Sprint wordprocessor for DOS was built on top of
an EMACS clone.

I wonder if the way to go is to make out that it is a whole _new_
editor, but not mention that it's based on Emacs? :-D

> But to use it for editing plain, unmarked text is like using a Saturn V
> launcher to rescue your drone stuck in a tree.

Aha. Interesting. I've not heard it put like that before.

It disagrees with one of my favourite ever tech essays:

"In the Beginning was the Command Line"  by Neal Stephenson
http://cristal.inria.fr/~weis/info/commandline.html


>  On heavily marked text,
> however, such as TEI, it's the only free system available with proper
> controls; and its biggest use is for program code, which has a wholly
> different set of requirements.


Hmmmmm. Maybe I should reconsider and give ErgoEmacs another go...


--
Liam Proven - Profile: https://about.me/liamproven
Email: [hidden email] - Google Mail/Hangouts/Plus: [hidden email]
Twitter/Facebook/Flickr: lproven - Skype/LinkedIn: liamproven
UK: +44 7939-087884 - ČR (+ WhatsApp/Telegram/Signal): +420 702 829 053

--
ubuntu-users mailing list
[hidden email]
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-users
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: 'Emacs style' delete line shortcut (CTRL/U) doesn't work correctly in Firefox

Peter Flynn
In reply to this post by Liam Proven
On 12/10/18 14:53, Liam Proven wrote:[...]
> In work up to the late 1990s... let me think...
>
[snip]

I probably bumped into some of those but I managed to discover UNIX and
then Linux early enough to be able to dictate my own work-pattern.

> WordPerfect Corp could probably make a decent fist of it, if they tried.

Actually they did. WP8 came with a fully-fledged XML editor using an
XML-based stylesheet mechanism. It worked well, but by then the XML
people at WP were fleeing for other (corporate/management) reasons.

> Ahhhh... I never tried on an existing file, or a new blank file. I
> just used the buffers there when I opened it to experiment.

Yes, it's not a very impressive start-up. Better than it used to be,
though :-(

> Interesting. I don't use _editor_ macros for that. In the old days, I
> wrote a bit of QuickBASIC or maybe a shell script.

I think this is why MSMcQ was so insistent in his description that if
you want macros, an editor should run a known, recognised programming
language to write them in, not some concoction of the authors' liking.

> Fair point. The rise of languages with embeddable pre-existing
> controls has helped that a lot, in my world.

Yes, I see a lot of TinyMCE, although it's not always that configurable
in context.

> Hmmm. Good point. Historical tradition and ego... :-(

Ego has a lot to do with it. Not that I'm decrying what RMS has done —
far from it, as he has had an uphill battle to fight.

> I think at the level of casual non-techies, using Macs or Windows,
> it's mostly all one now.

Yes, it's all basic point and click, and no knowledge needed (exc ept
for how to point and click :-)

The BIG missing bit in Linux is multimedia support: there are still too
many formats out there which will get you the grey rectangle and "This
format is not supported". Flash is obviously the worst offender by a
long way.

> And the real casual users are moving to tablets and phones, anyway.
> PCs are becoming arcane.

I no longer take my laptop away on a trip. My large phone and BT
keyboard work perfectly with a plaintext editor and a command window.

> This is one place ChromeOS is strong. Stronger than almost anyone's
> noticed. It's a clever play by Google.

Never used it. If I can't run Emacs, Saxon (Java), and LaTeX it's not
interesting.

> We have truly lost *so* much, it makes me almost weep.

Perhaps we can take this to a private thread: I am writing a paper for
next year's Markup UK on 'Software we have lost' and I'd appreciate
knowing what other people rate as 'lost'.

> Here's a wonderful ½hr 2013 presentation *pretending* to from 1973,
> about what _should_ have been the next 40 years. Watch it, laugh, and
> then mourn.

I'm missing the link to that.

///Peter

--
ubuntu-users mailing list
[hidden email]
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-users
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: 'Emacs style' delete line shortcut (CTRL/U) doesn't work correctly in Firefox

Liam Proven
On Fri, 12 Oct 2018 at 17:51, Peter Flynn <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> Actually they did. WP8 came with a fully-fledged XML editor using an
> XML-based stylesheet mechanism. It worked well, but by then the XML
> people at WP were fleeing for other (corporate/management) reasons.

Oh really? I didn't know. I have a copy around here -- I must try it!

> Yes, it's not a very impressive start-up. Better than it used to be,
> though :-(

Ah.

> I think this is why MSMcQ was so insistent in his description that if
> you want macros, an editor should run a known, recognised programming
> language to write them in, not some concoction of the authors' liking.

Now I understand. Thanks.

> Ego has a lot to do with it. Not that I'm decrying what RMS has done —
> far from it, as he has had an uphill battle to fight.

True.

> The BIG missing bit in Linux is multimedia support: there are still too
> many formats out there which will get you the grey rectangle and "This
> format is not supported". Flash is obviously the worst offender by a
> long way.

Rarely happens to me any more, TBH. Very rarely. Ubuntu is a bit
better than openSUSE in that respect.

> I no longer take my laptop away on a trip. My large phone and BT
> keyboard work perfectly with a plaintext editor and a command window.

Hold that thought...
>
> > This is one place ChromeOS is strong. Stronger than almost anyone's
> > noticed. It's a clever play by Google.
>
> Never used it. If I can't run Emacs, Saxon (Java), and LaTeX it's not
> interesting.

[1] Do they run on your phone? 8-)

[2] ChromeOS now can run Linux apps in a sandbox -- so yes, it can.

Disclaimer -- I haven't got a Chromebook (yet) and haven't tried. But
the current and last few versions not only run the handful of native
apps, they also run Android and standard Linux apps.

> Perhaps we can take this to a private thread: I am writing a paper for
> next year's Markup UK on 'Software we have lost' and I'd appreciate
> knowing what other people rate as 'lost'.

You might find my FOSDEM talk from last year interesting, then:

https://liam-on-linux.livejournal.com/56835.html

> > Here's a wonderful ½hr 2013 presentation *pretending* to from 1973,
> > about what _should_ have been the next 40 years. Watch it, laugh, and
> > then mourn.
>
> I'm missing the link to that.

Oops!

https://youtu.be/8pTEmbeENF4

Deserves to be very widely-known.

--
Liam Proven - Profile: https://about.me/liamproven
Email: [hidden email] - Google Mail/Hangouts/Plus: [hidden email]
Twitter/Facebook/Flickr: lproven - Skype/LinkedIn: liamproven
UK: +44 7939-087884 - ČR (+ WhatsApp/Telegram/Signal): +420 702 829 053

--
ubuntu-users mailing list
[hidden email]
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-users
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: 'Emacs style' delete line shortcut (CTRL/U) doesn't work correctly in Firefox

Gene Heskett-2
In reply to this post by Peter Flynn
On Friday 12 October 2018 11:49:21 Peter Flynn wrote:

> On 12/10/18 14:53, Liam Proven wrote:[...]
>
> > In work up to the late 1990s... let me think...
>
> [snip]
>
> I probably bumped into some of those but I managed to discover UNIX
> and then Linux early enough to be able to dictate my own work-pattern.
>
> > WordPerfect Corp could probably make a decent fist of it, if they
> > tried.
>
> Actually they did. WP8 came with a fully-fledged XML editor using an
> XML-based stylesheet mechanism. It worked well, but by then the XML
> people at WP were fleeing for other (corporate/management) reasons.

And I have a legal, all accounted and paid for ($99.90+tax) copy of WP8
in a box with all dox, about 3.5" thick on a shelf above me. It very
clearly, in blue plain text letters about 1" high, says FOR LINUX on the
box. But what it didn't say was that it was for Corels version of linux,
a costly abomination I had no intentions of trying to install. And guess
what, its loaded with corel linux dependencies on stuff that Red Hat 5.1
had already left behind in the late '90's. I've long since given up ever
trying to use it on a decent linux so I still do not know what it looks
like or how it runs.

Corel has of course vanished, cutting their own throat, but somebody at
Corel owes me the hundred bucks I paid for it, plus interest over the
last nearly 20 years.  One of the life lessons I've learned at the hands
of someone too much like the old the M$.

> > Ahhhh... I never tried on an existing file, or a new blank file. I
> > just used the buffers there when I opened it to experiment.
>
> Yes, it's not a very impressive start-up. Better than it used to be,
> though :-(
>
> > Interesting. I don't use _editor_ macros for that. In the old days,
> > I wrote a bit of QuickBASIC or maybe a shell script.
>
> I think this is why MSMcQ was so insistent in his description that if
> you want macros, an editor should run a known, recognised programming
> language to write them in, not some concoction of the authors' liking.
>
> > Fair point. The rise of languages with embeddable pre-existing
> > controls has helped that a lot, in my world.
>
> Yes, I see a lot of TinyMCE, although it's not always that
> configurable in context.
>
> > Hmmm. Good point. Historical tradition and ego... :-(
>
> Ego has a lot to do with it. Not that I'm decrying what RMS has done —
> far from it, as he has had an uphill battle to fight.
>
> > I think at the level of casual non-techies, using Macs or Windows,
> > it's mostly all one now.
>
> Yes, it's all basic point and click, and no knowledge needed (exc ept
> for how to point and click :-)
>
> The BIG missing bit in Linux is multimedia support: there are still
> too many formats out there which will get you the grey rectangle and
> "This format is not supported". Flash is obviously the worst offender
> by a long way.
>
> > And the real casual users are moving to tablets and phones, anyway.
> > PCs are becoming arcane.
>
> I no longer take my laptop away on a trip. My large phone and BT
> keyboard work perfectly with a plaintext editor and a command window.
>
> > This is one place ChromeOS is strong. Stronger than almost anyone's
> > noticed. It's a clever play by Google.
>
> Never used it. If I can't run Emacs, Saxon (Java), and LaTeX it's not
> interesting.
>
> > We have truly lost *so* much, it makes me almost weep.
>
> Perhaps we can take this to a private thread: I am writing a paper for
> next year's Markup UK on 'Software we have lost' and I'd appreciate
> knowing what other people rate as 'lost'.
>
> > Here's a wonderful ½hr 2013 presentation *pretending* to from 1973,
> > about what _should_ have been the next 40 years. Watch it, laugh,
> > and then mourn.
>
> I'm missing the link to that.
>
> ///Peter



--
Cheers, Gene Heskett
--
"There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty:
 soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order."
-Ed Howdershelt (Author)
Genes Web page <http://geneslinuxbox.net:6309/gene>

--
ubuntu-users mailing list
[hidden email]
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-users
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: 'Emacs style' delete line shortcut (CTRL/U) doesn't work correctly in Firefox

Peter Flynn
In reply to this post by Liam Proven
On 12/10/18 15:05, Liam Proven wrote:[me]
>> As you say, fixing Emacs is pretty straightforward.
>
> I wish I had the skills.

Me too. I can cobble together stuff for my .emacs file, but eLisp eLudes me.

> Mind you, CREAM is pretty impressive.

It is. It's also an anagram of EmacR :-)

> I wonder if the way to go is to make out that it is a whole _new_
> editor, but not mention that it's based on Emacs? :-D

It would be hard to hide the bodies, but yes, it could be done.

>> But to use it for editing plain, unmarked text is like using a Saturn V
>> launcher to rescue your drone stuck in a tree.
>
> Aha. Interesting. I've not heard it put like that before.

:-)

> It disagrees with one of my favourite ever tech essays:
>
> "In the Beginning was the Command Line"  by Neal Stephenson
> http://cristal.inria.fr/~weis/info/commandline.html

One of my faves too, but it's 20 years ago now. What I mean is, if you
only ever want to edit the ASCII text of novels, with no formatting and
no markup. Emacs is unnecessary. Notepad will do just fine.

> Hmmmmm. Maybe I should reconsider and give ErgoEmacs another go...

If I wanted to use a fancy GUI editor to edit XML there are dozens of
choices from the cheap[-ish] to the ludicrously expensive. Several of
them are really excellent, especially if you are developing the XSLT
styling and Javascript interaction as well as writing the XML code. But
not a single one of them is usable by someone who knows nothing about
pointy-bracket markup (with respect, most writers). Emacs in nxml-mode
or psgml-mode is even less usable by the non-XML person, but with those
modes it becomes the only validating XML editor that is completely free.
But it will break every rule you live by, so I suggest oXygen instead.

///Peter


--
ubuntu-users mailing list
[hidden email]
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-users
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: 'Emacs style' delete line shortcut (CTRL/U) doesn't work correctly in Firefox

Peter Flynn
In reply to this post by Liam Proven
On 12/10/18 17:02, Liam Proven wrote:
[wp8]
> Oh really? I didn't know. I have a copy around here -- I must try it!

http://xml.silmaril.ie/downloads/wordperfect-xml.pdf

>> Never used it. If I can't run Emacs, Saxon (Java), and LaTeX it's not
>> interesting.
>
> [1] Do they run on your phone? 8-)

Yep. Although my current phone is now so full of Samsung crud it's
becoming unusable.

> [2] ChromeOS now can run Linux apps in a sandbox -- so yes, it can.

That might fix the problem.

> You might find my FOSDEM talk from last year interesting, then:

Very. Thank you.

> https://youtu.be/8pTEmbeENF4

Sadly, yes.

P

--
ubuntu-users mailing list
[hidden email]
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-users
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: 'Emacs style' delete line shortcut (CTRL/U) doesn't work correctly in Firefox

Peter Flynn
In reply to this post by Gene Heskett-2
On 12/10/18 17:19, Gene Heskett wrote:

> On Friday 12 October 2018 11:49:21 Peter Flynn wrote:
>> On 12/10/18 14:53, Liam Proven wrote:[...]
>>> WordPerfect Corp could probably make a decent fist of it, [...]
>> Actually they did. WP8 came with a fully-fledged XML editor [...]
>
> And I have a legal, all accounted and paid for ($99.90+tax) copy of WP8
> in a box with all dox, about 3.5" thick on a shelf above me. It very
> clearly, in blue plain text letters about 1" high, says FOR LINUX on the
> box. But what it didn't say was that it was for Corels version of linux,
> a costly abomination I had no intentions of trying to install.

My version was for Windows which they gave me to review. I did also
download their first Linux version, whose filename always amused me
(knowing some of the people involved :-) This was a gzipped tar file (no
filetype or extension): GUILG00

The point was that this was shortly after WordPerfect-for-Windows came
out — a GUI version was believed to be an aberration: the "real"
WordPerfect was still felt by staff to be the DOS character-cell version
(6), and many people would agree with them.

> Corel has of course vanished, cutting their own throat, but somebody at
> Corel owes me the hundred bucks I paid for it, plus interest over the
> last nearly 20 years.  One of the life lessons I've learned at the hands
> of someone too much like the old the M$.

They were told in no uncertain terms what to do, and chose to ignore it,
alas.

///Peter

--
ubuntu-users mailing list
[hidden email]
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-users
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: 'Emacs style' delete line shortcut (CTRL/U) doesn't work correctly in Firefox

Liam Proven
In reply to this post by Gene Heskett-2
On Fri, 12 Oct 2018 at 18:21, Gene Heskett <[hidden email]> wrote:

>
> And I have a legal, all accounted and paid for ($99.90+tax) copy of WP8
> in a box with all dox, about 3.5" thick on a shelf above me. It very
> clearly, in blue plain text letters about 1" high, says FOR LINUX on the
> box. But what it didn't say was that it was for Corels version of linux,
> a costly abomination I had no intentions of trying to install. And guess
> what, its loaded with corel linux dependencies on stuff that Red Hat 5.1
> had already left behind in the late '90's. I've long since given up ever
> trying to use it on a decent linux so I still do not know what it looks
> like or how it runs.

I have a long-standing project to try to get it running in a container
and re-package the free version in that form, so that it could be used
on modern distros, in a distro-neutral form.

> Corel has of course vanished, cutting their own throat, but somebody at
> Corel owes me the hundred bucks I paid for it, plus interest over the
> last nearly 20 years.  One of the life lessons I've learned at the hands
> of someone too much like the old the M$.

I'd be very happy to take it off your hands, postage etc. included.

Corel is alive and well. So is WordPerfect which in its Windows form
is a pretty decent app these days.

Sadly, its management were both desperate and gullible.

First it decided Linux was clearly an important OS in the near future,
which was correct. It invested heavily: it developed Corel LinuxOS,
the friendliest spin of Debian ever at the time, with impressive
features for the time such as a graphical tool for adjusting screen
resolution settings, and IMHO the best distribution of KDE ever done.

It also invested in ARM-based Linux hardware, the NetWinder. This was
a great little machine.

And it did a Linux version of the whole WP office suite, by porting it
to WINE -- it recompiled the whole suite on winelib and then fixed the
bits that didn't work right. WP8 for Linux, OTOH, was a continuation
(indeed, the last version of) of the original WP for Unix line.
Remember that WP was not a DOS app originally -- MS-DOS was the 4th or
5th port of the software.

But then, some gullible idiot at HQ thought that the problems of WP
Office on Windows were that it didn't have the same style of buttons
and the same macro language as MS Office. (This, I think, is obvious
nonsense.)

It licensed the "MS Office look and feel" and Visual BASIC for
Applications from MS, for $LOTS.

Part of the deal was to kill all Corel's Linux efforts immediately.

So Corel sold off the NetWinder, spun off the Linux business as
Xandros (a decent distro in its day), and killed WP Office on Linux.

MS of course just changed the Office look & feel in the next version
anyway, as it does.

VBA made very little difference to anyone and I think it might have
been abandoned now anyway.

WP Office for Linux would never have made much money -- few Linux
users like paying for software -- but it would have legitimised
desktop Linux at the time. There was no credible office suite for
Linux back then. StarOffice was both obscure and commercial.

--
Liam Proven - Profile: https://about.me/liamproven
Email: [hidden email] - Google Mail/Hangouts/Plus: [hidden email]
Twitter/Facebook/Flickr: lproven - Skype/LinkedIn: liamproven
UK: +44 7939-087884 - ČR (+ WhatsApp/Telegram/Signal): +420 702 829 053

--
ubuntu-users mailing list
[hidden email]
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-users
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: 'Emacs style' delete line shortcut (CTRL/U) doesn't work correctly in Firefox

Liam Proven
In reply to this post by Peter Flynn
On Fri, 12 Oct 2018 at 21:01, Peter Flynn <[hidden email]> wrote:
> My version was for Windows which they gave me to review. I did also
> download their first Linux version, whose filename always amused me
> (knowing some of the people involved :-) This was a gzipped tar file (no
> filetype or extension): GUILG00
>
> The point was that this was shortly after WordPerfect-for-Windows came
> out — a GUI version was believed to be an aberration: the "real"
> WordPerfect was still felt by staff to be the DOS character-cell version
> (6), and many people would agree with them.

Heh. There's definitely some truth in that.

I have mixed feelings about the decline and fall of WP.

I knew it, because I had to support it. It vanquished WordStar as
*the* DOS word-processor, and as DOS was *the* business OS for many
years, that made it important.

But I never personally liked it much. It wasn't CUA-compliant, and I
found the multiply-overloaded F-key UI to be hard to use. I could use
it, but I didn't like it.

However, for its time, WP 4.2 was a classic app. Blindingly fast, the
best printer support in the industry, used everywhere, and powerful.
It had good rich font support, when leading WP apps like MultiMate
didn't even support the "high-end" feature of proportional spacing.
(!)

WP 5.0 was a big buggy but for many people, WP 5.1 was the classic
version. I personally preferred it, because it had decent usable
drop-down menus if you didn't know all the function keys. Also you
could switch WP weirdnesses off (Esc was "repeat character", F3 was
Help (normally F1); in 5.1 you could switch F1 to Help and Repeat Char
to F3, thus freeing up Esc to mean "cancel the last operation", its
more normal operation, and more similar changes.)

But an early hero of mine, later a friend, the late great Guy Kewney,
wrote of WP 5:

"WordPerfect 4.2 was like a bicycle. It was perfect. It did everything
you could want, while being simple, reliable and fast. So what they
did is, they said 'we have the best bicycle in the world, as everyone
says. So what we're going to do is, we're going to put seven more
wheels on it."

(I quote from faint memory, and probably wrongly. Any attempt to
Google it merely finds me quoting it elsewhere.)

I have WP6.2 for DOS at home. Most people thought WP6.x was a
Windows-only app but there was a DOS version in the package too.

It's interesting because as well as the classic character-mode WP,
still fast and clean and efficient, you can also switch it into
graphics mode. Then it has a rather Windows-3-ish full rich GUI, all
drawn in DOS with no Windows present. It renders WYSIWYG fonts, bold
and underline and italics, and on a 21st century PC, it's *fast*.

Here's what it looks like:

https://thewanderingnerd.wordpress.com/2015/04/19/corel-wordperfect-6-2-for-dos-a-look-back/

If you enjoy that, he mentions more screenshots but the link 404s.
They're these, I think:

https://www.danielsays.com/ssg-dos-cwpsfd.html

But as Guy pointed out later:

http://newswireless.site.ramtops.org/index.cfm/article/3963

WP was so dominant and so many people knew its keystrokes that the
first few versions of Word for Windows had a "WordPerfect mode" which
set the text to white on a blue background and understood most of the
WP function key commands. (!)

> They were told in no uncertain terms what to do, and chose to ignore it,
> alas.

Well, not AIUI... along with Lotus, WordPerfect Corp was one of the 2
big players who bought into the OS/2 dream. WordPerfect was released
on OS/2 before Windows, as was Lotus 1-2-3. I think the OS/2
WordPerfect was the first true GUI version with WYSIWYG... I recall
WordPerfect for the Atari ST and for the Commodore Amiga, running
natively under those OS's GUIs, but AFAICR it didn't support actual
GUI operation -- it was still basically a text-mode app in a window.

Here are some pics of the only native Linux version, WP 8:

https://danielsays.com/ssg-linux-cwp8fl.html

I personally rather liked it. I did get it working on Ubuntu 8.
Nothing later, though.



--
Liam Proven - Profile: https://about.me/liamproven
Email: [hidden email] - Google Mail/Hangouts/Plus: [hidden email]
Twitter/Facebook/Flickr: lproven - Skype/LinkedIn: liamproven
UK: +44 7939-087884 - ČR (+ WhatsApp/Telegram/Signal): +420 702 829 053

--
ubuntu-users mailing list
[hidden email]
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-users
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: 'Emacs style' delete line shortcut (CTRL/U) doesn't work correctly in Firefox

Peter Flynn
On 15/10/18 08:27, Liam Proven wrote:
[...]
> Corel is alive and well. So is WordPerfect which in its Windows form
> is a pretty decent app these days.

That is good news. It was always a better wordprocessor than Word,
particularly for long or complex documents — possibly the only
wordprocessor to create publishable quality...at the time.

> Sadly, its management were both desperate and gullible.

And, one has to add, ignorant.

> And it did a Linux version of the whole WP office suite, by porting it
> to WINE -- it recompiled the whole suite on winelib and then fixed the
> bits that didn't work right.

IMHO that was a mistake. It slowed it to a crawl and introduced
dependencies that it didn't need.

> But then, some gullible idiot at HQ thought that the problems of WP
> Office on Windows were that it didn't have the same style of buttons
> and the same macro language as MS Office. (This, I think, is obvious
> nonsense.)

Same macro language I can't argue with: compatibility was an issue.
Same style of buttons is exactly the kind of thing you can fool gullible
marketing people with, though.

> WP Office for Linux would never have made much money -- few Linux
> users like paying for software -- but it would have legitimised
> desktop Linux at the time. There was no credible office suite for
> Linux back then. StarOffice was both obscure and commercial.

What they failed to understand was that very influential technical
people -- almost all of them with a background in the UNIX/Linux field
-- would have killed for a functioning Linux wordprocessor and would
gladly have been very vocal in praising it. Trashing WP8 for Linux was a
marketing gaffe of the first order.

> But I never personally liked it much. It wasn't CUA-compliant, and I
> found the multiply-overloaded F-key UI to be hard to use. I could use
> it, but I didn't like it.

I actually hated it.

> However, for its time, WP 4.2 was a classic app. Blindingly fast, the
> best printer support in the industry, used everywhere, and powerful.

Rivalled only at the time by PC-Write, whose printer support was equally
good, and it supported proportional-width fonts. But it was shareware,
and businesses didn't understand it.

> WP 5.0 was a big buggy but for many people, WP 5.1 was the classic
> version. I personally preferred it,

By this time I was using Pandora, the typesetting industry's fork of WP
for DOS, which could Save As...SGML and had the best tables editor in
the business. Plus the marching display of tags in the footer, so that
you knew where in the document you were, structurally. That folded when
Elsevier switched to XML and made their typesetters find software
themselves.
> But an early hero of mine, later a friend, the late great Guy Kewney,
> wrote of WP 5:

Good grief. I remember Guy from his time at PCW, one of the funniest and
most literate guys you could meet. I believe your quote is accurate.

>> They were told in no uncertain terms what to do, and chose to
>> ignore it, alas.
>
> Well, not AIUI... along with Lotus, WordPerfect Corp was one of the
> 2 big players who bought into the OS/2 dream.

Sorry, I didn't make it clear I was talking about their SGML/XML editor.
Another instance of having a really excellent product and junking it
right at the moment it would have been a killer app. The only other
product to rival that was Microsoft's SGML Author for Word, which,
despite the name, was a conversion program, not an editor. They killed
it just as people started to ask for conversion from Word to XML and
back because it could convert to "real" SGML, not the stuff you find
inside a .docx file these days. But that's a whole other story.

///Peter



--
ubuntu-users mailing list
[hidden email]
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-users
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: 'Emacs style' delete line shortcut (CTRL/U) doesn't work correctly in Firefox

Liam Proven
On Mon, 15 Oct 2018 at 15:44, Peter Flynn <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> That is good news. It was always a better wordprocessor than Word,
> particularly for long or complex documents — possibly the only
> wordprocessor to create publishable quality...at the time.

Agreed.

It held on in the legal field in the UK for _decades_ and that made me
a little bit of money fixing balky systems.

When you're charging several hundred pounds per hour or per page for
documents, you want a _very_ accurate word count.

MS Word counts words in the main document. It does not (or did not)
include headers, footers, auto-generated or imported text, etc.

WordPerfect tells you how many words. All of them. With _no_ exceptions.

It also sometimes leaves bits of deleted or edited-out text in the
saved files, which can be extremely legally embarrassing.

(Due to a very clever algorithm by Charles Simonyi, which was
responsible for the program's good performance in some areas:

https://web.archive.org/web/20160308183811/http://1017.songtrellisopml.com/whatsbeenwroughtusingpiecetables

)

WordPerfect doesn't. Not ever.

So, lawyers stuck with it until well into the WinXP era.

Another boat that WP missed, therefore.


> > Sadly, its management were both desperate and gullible.
>
> And, one has to add, ignorant.

Can't entirely disagree.

They were also Mormons, I think. Any particular connection there may
or may not be is left as an exercise to the reader.

> > And it did a Linux version of the whole WP office suite, by porting it
> > to WINE -- it recompiled the whole suite on winelib and then fixed the
> > bits that didn't work right.
>
> IMHO that was a mistake. It slowed it to a crawl and introduced
> dependencies that it didn't need.

Yes, agreed, but it _was_ an early legitimisation of both Linux and
indeed of WINE.

Also, it was how Mac Office was produced for quite a long time,
possible still, and what made it work was the combination of hardware
speed improvements, Mac OS X and some cosmetic polish, rather than any
big technical backtrack.

MS Word 1 through to 5 were native Mac apps.

6 and later were from a single code base -- in other words, they were
effectively Windows ports. Microsoft ported its class libraries to
MacOS and that enabled a large amount of Windows code re-use.

I think some of the code in Word for DOS might be traceable back to
Visual BASIC for DOS. It has the same look-and-feel. I suspect Word 6
for DOS was a pig too, but nobody noticed at the time and now any DOS
app runs like lightning on a modern PC.

> > But then, some gullible idiot at HQ thought that the problems of WP
> > Office on Windows were that it didn't have the same style of buttons
> > and the same macro language as MS Office. (This, I think, is obvious
> > nonsense.)
>
> Same macro language I can't argue with: compatibility was an issue.

True.

But the cost was too high.

If you use a whole different office suite, you probably don't really care.

> Same style of buttons is exactly the kind of thing you can fool gullible
> marketing people with, though.

Agreed.

> What they failed to understand was that very influential technical
> people -- almost all of them with a background in the UNIX/Linux field
> -- would have killed for a functioning Linux wordprocessor and would
> gladly have been very vocal in praising it. Trashing WP8 for Linux was a
> marketing gaffe of the first order.

Yes yes yes. So much yes.

> > But I never personally liked it much. It wasn't CUA-compliant, and I
> > found the multiply-overloaded F-key UI to be hard to use. I could use
> > it, but I didn't like it.
>
> I actually hated it.

OK, OK, me too. I was attempting to be a bit tactful.

> > However, for its time, WP 4.2 was a classic app. Blindingly fast, the
> > best printer support in the industry, used everywhere, and powerful.
>
> Rivalled only at the time by PC-Write, whose printer support was equally
> good, and it supported proportional-width fonts. But it was shareware,
> and businesses didn't understand it.

That I did not know. I dabbled experimentally with it, no more.

> > WP 5.0 was a big buggy but for many people, WP 5.1 was the classic
> > version. I personally preferred it,
>
> By this time I was using Pandora, the typesetting industry's fork of WP
> for DOS, which could Save As...SGML and had the best tables editor in
> the business. Plus the marching display of tags in the footer, so that
> you knew where in the document you were, structurally. That folded when
> Elsevier switched to XML and made their typesetters find software
> themselves.

I didn't know that one, but I only encountered XML professionally from
2014 onwards.

I am *not* a fan.

> > But an early hero of mine, later a friend, the late great Guy Kewney,
> > wrote of WP 5:
>
> Good grief. I remember Guy from his time at PCW, one of the funniest and
> most literate guys you could meet. I believe your quote is accurate.

Yes, absolutely. Lovely chap. Bowel cancer got him but he faced it
with remarkable bravery and fortitude.

I was very proud that he occasionally phoned or emailed me for tech advice.

> >> They were told in no uncertain terms what to do, and chose to
> >> ignore it, alas.
> >
> > Well, not AIUI... along with Lotus, WordPerfect Corp was one of the
> > 2 big players who bought into the OS/2 dream.
>
> Sorry, I didn't make it clear I was talking about their SGML/XML editor.
> Another instance of having a really excellent product and junking it
> right at the moment it would have been a killer app.


Oh, I see! Well, I can't comment as I never saw it -- but I much
admired your write-up there -- but since the idea occurred to me
recently, I suspect it was probably pretty good.


> The only other
> product to rival that was Microsoft's SGML Author for Word, which,
> despite the name, was a conversion program, not an editor. They killed
> it just as people started to ask for conversion from Word to XML and
> back because it could convert to "real" SGML, not the stuff you find
> inside a .docx file these days. But that's a whole other story.

Well, yes... :-)

I am still learning to produce clear, readable DocBook, thanks in part
to some occasionally-crunchy feedback from my more expert colleagues.
--
Liam Proven - Profile: https://about.me/liamproven
Email: [hidden email] - Google Mail/Hangouts/Plus: [hidden email]
Twitter/Facebook/Flickr: lproven - Skype/LinkedIn: liamproven
UK: +44 7939-087884 - ČR (+ WhatsApp/Telegram/Signal): +420 702 829 053

--
ubuntu-users mailing list
[hidden email]
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-users
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: 'Emacs style' delete line shortcut (CTRL/U) doesn't work correctly in Firefox

Jim Byrnes-4
On 10/15/2018 09:10 AM, Liam Proven wrote:

> On Mon, 15 Oct 2018 at 15:44, Peter Flynn <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>
>> That is good news. It was always a better wordprocessor than Word,
>> particularly for long or complex documents — possibly the only
>> wordprocessor to create publishable quality...at the time.
>
> Agreed.
>
> It held on in the legal field in the UK for _decades_ and that made me
> a little bit of money fixing balky systems.
>

This reminds me that about 10 years ago I was in my lawyers office and I
somehow noticed he was using WP. I had just assumed that professionals
would all would be using MSWord. He said no. If you wanted to exchange
documents you had to be using WP, especially in small firms. I don't
know if it is still that way.

Regards,  Jim


--
ubuntu-users mailing list
[hidden email]
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-users
123