239 lines
13 KiB
HTML
239 lines
13 KiB
HTML
<!--startcut ==========================================================-->
|
|
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 3.2//EN">
|
|
<HTML>
|
|
<HEAD>
|
|
<title>WordPerfect and LyX</title>
|
|
</head>
|
|
|
|
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
|
|
<!--endcut ============================================================-->
|
|
|
|
<H4>
|
|
"Linux Gazette...<I>making Linux just a little more fun!</I>"
|
|
</H4>
|
|
|
|
<P> <HR> <P>
|
|
<!--===================================================================-->
|
|
|
|
<center><h1>Comparing WordPerfect and LyX</h1></center>
|
|
|
|
<center>
|
|
<h4><a href="mailto: layers@marktwain.net">by Larry Ayers</a></h4>
|
|
</center>
|
|
<hr>
|
|
|
|
<center><h3>Introduction</h3></center>
|
|
|
|
<p>Some months ago I bought a copy of SDCorp's Linux port of Corel's
|
|
WordPerfect 7, and have spent a fair amount of time learning to use it; during
|
|
the same time-period I have also been using various pre-beta releases of LyX
|
|
0.11, and more recently the new 0.12 release. In this article I will attempt
|
|
to compare the two pieces of software, both of which are intended to produce
|
|
high-quality printed documents, but which have such radically different
|
|
methods of accomplishing this task. It's not quite an apples-and-oranges
|
|
comparison, but approaches that state.
|
|
|
|
<center><h3>WordPerfect 7</h3></center>
|
|
|
|
<p>The WordPerfect Corporation is now owned by the Canadian firm Corel, but
|
|
a group of former WordPerfect programmers and other employees in Utah
|
|
(WordPerfect's former home) have formed a company called SDCorp. This company
|
|
has ported WordPerfect 7 to Linux and other unix variants, and have made the
|
|
port available as a downloadable demo (see their
|
|
<a href="http://www.sdcorp.com/wplinux">web-site</a>); the program is also
|
|
available on CDROM. The demo can be registered by purchasing an e-mailable
|
|
key-file.
|
|
|
|
<p>A few years ago WordPerfect was one of the most popular word-processors
|
|
available, first under DOS then later in Windows versions. It still possesses
|
|
a significant user-base, but it has been losing ground recently to the
|
|
ubiquitous Microsoft Word word-processors. Any text-processing system which
|
|
uses a proprietary document format is reliant upon either other users making
|
|
use of the same format or the availability of high-quality document filters
|
|
for translating documents into other formats. Microsoft has made this
|
|
situation more difficult by continually "upgrading" their Word format in a
|
|
more-or-less backwards-incompatible fashion, forcing other software firms to
|
|
rewrite their document filters.
|
|
|
|
<p>WP occupies an increasingly rare niche in the text-processing world, as
|
|
it's a full-featured word-processor but isn't one component of a massive
|
|
"suite" of related programs, such as MS-Word, Applix, and StarOffice (at least
|
|
in the Linux version; the Windows version is sold as a suite component). This
|
|
has advantages and disadvantages. On the plus side you don't have to bother
|
|
with making room for components which you might not need, and the tendency
|
|
towards bloat is lessened. On the other hand, some users like the
|
|
interoperability of a suite's components, and disk space is cheap these days.
|
|
If you want a word-processor which is quick to start up, can print well on
|
|
most printers (including inexpensive dot-matrix machines), and does a good job
|
|
with included graphics files, WordPerfect is a good choice. Of course, the
|
|
price is a sticking point for Linux users accustomed to high quality free
|
|
software. What you get for the money is a wide variety of good printer
|
|
drivers, many input and output filters for different document formats, easy
|
|
graphics inclusion, and a time-tested interface and document-processing
|
|
engine. This word-processor is also less memory-hungry than some competing
|
|
products, requiring roughly the same resources as does GNU Emacs.
|
|
|
|
<p>One reason for WordPerfect's popularity is the "reveal codes" feature,
|
|
which shows an editable view of the current file with the internal formatting
|
|
codes visible. This gives the user more control of the underlying
|
|
text-processing, comparable to but not as extensive as the flexibility LaTeX
|
|
tagging allows.
|
|
|
|
<p>WordPerfect has its own documentation browser, complete with a handy
|
|
topic-search utility. Unfortunately the help is nowhere near as complete and
|
|
detailed as the exhaustive hardcopy manuals which used to be included with the
|
|
DOS versions.
|
|
|
|
<p>Making new fonts available to WordPerfect isn't immediately intuitive;
|
|
there is a separate program called <b>xwpfi</b> in the <i>/shbin10</i>
|
|
directory which facilitates this process. Rod Smith has written an
|
|
informative series of web-pages which contain useful techniques for dealing
|
|
with WordPerfect and fonts; they are available at
|
|
<a href="http://www.users.fast.net/~rodsmith/wpfonts.html">this site</a>.
|
|
|
|
<p>The April 1998 issue of the Linux Journal has a quite favorable review of
|
|
WordPerfect written by Michael Shappe. Since that review was written the
|
|
retail price has been reduced, and there is a fifty dollar discount if you
|
|
have an old version of WordPerfect or a registered copy of any of several
|
|
competing products. Incidentally, I've never noticed the slight keyboard lag
|
|
Michael Shappe mentions in his review; my hardware is roughly equivalent to
|
|
his, but for me WordPerfect keeps up with typing as well any text editor under
|
|
X. He did mention that his test machine is a laptop, so the difference in
|
|
video drivers and screen type may have something to do with his slow response.
|
|
|
|
<p>SDCorp has recently announced student pricing as well, which brings
|
|
the price ($59.00) closer to those of some competing products.
|
|
|
|
<center><h3>LyX</h3></center>
|
|
|
|
<p>From the free (or open-source) software world comes a different sort of
|
|
program with similar purposes. Lyx makes no attempt to display the exact
|
|
appearance of the document, just a version which is readable and looks good on
|
|
the screen. Rather then WYSIWYG (what you see is what you get) the developers
|
|
describe it as WYSIWYM (what you see is what you mean). The major difference
|
|
is the reliance upon a configured LaTeX installation. A typical TeTex
|
|
installation (the flavor of LaTeX supplied with both Redhat and Debian)
|
|
occupies about thirty megabytes of disk-space (add another five to six mb. for
|
|
LyX), while a WordPerfect installation needs over seventy. So a LyX
|
|
installation is really more compact, but some people are put off by the
|
|
reliance upon LaTeX, as it has a reputation of being abstruse, suited to
|
|
academics rather than to ordinary people desiring to compose and print out
|
|
nicely-formatted documents. One of the design goals of LyX is to shield the
|
|
user from needing to know too much about LaTeX and how it works, though
|
|
provision is made for users who would like to include LaTeX commands directly.
|
|
|
|
<p>LaTeX users often edit their marked-up text in a text editor (Emacs with
|
|
AucTeX is popular), leaving either xdvi or a Postscript previewer such as gv
|
|
or ghostscript running so that an updated view of the formatted document can
|
|
be viewed at will. This also works well with LyX, though it will seem to be a
|
|
cumbersome approach to users accustomed to the single document view of a
|
|
standard word-processor. Using LyX I more often don't view the formatted
|
|
document until a late draft, as the LyX-formatted view, though not identical
|
|
to the printed output, is close enough for writing purposes.
|
|
|
|
<p>If you have previously tried the last beta release, 0.10.7, 0.12 will come
|
|
as a pleasant surprise. After dozens of developer's releases in the past year
|
|
many bugs have been dealt with (and new features added), but even more
|
|
significant from a new user's perspective is the greatly improved
|
|
documentation. Several levels of help and introductory document files are
|
|
included, ranging from very basic (intended for people who have no experience
|
|
with LaTeX) to an exhaustively complete reference manual. Midway is the very
|
|
well-done User's Guide, which helped me get up to speed quickly. All of the
|
|
documentation is available from the menu-bar. Naturally (since LyX is still
|
|
in beta) some of the documentation is still incomplete, but in its current
|
|
state it is superior to much of the commercial software documentation I'm
|
|
familiar with.
|
|
|
|
<p>An interesting site-specific document is generated during installation and
|
|
is subsequently available from the help-menu. It's called
|
|
<b>LatexConfig.lyx</b>; it consists of an inventory of LaTeX packages found on
|
|
your system along with pointers for obtaining useful packages which may be
|
|
lacking.
|
|
|
|
<p>LaTeX (and thus LyX) is unparalleled in its handling of documents with
|
|
complex structure, dynamically keeping track of section numbers, footnotes,
|
|
and references even in book-length documents. WordPerfect's abilities in this
|
|
area are sufficient for most needs, but lack some of the dynamic updating LyX
|
|
is capable of.
|
|
|
|
<p>Though most non-academic users have little use for accurate rendering of
|
|
mathematical equations, LyX provides an easy-to-use and convenient interface
|
|
to LaTeX's mathematical modes. WordPerfect includes an Equation Editor which
|
|
can do most of what LyX can, but it's much less intuitive. I was able to
|
|
enter equations into a LyX document without reading the manual, whereas
|
|
WordPerfect's interface is cryptic, and it seems some study of the
|
|
documentation would be necessary to get very far with it.
|
|
|
|
<p>Many LaTeX users are still a little irked that while LyX can convert its
|
|
internal format to usable LaTeX, converting an existing LaTeX document still
|
|
isn't supported. Included with the LyX source (though not with binary
|
|
distributions) is a Perl script which can do limited conversion from LaTeX to
|
|
LyX. It doesn't work with all documents, but might be worth a try. This sort
|
|
of conversion is planned for a future version of LyX, along with compile-time
|
|
user-interface toolkit configurability. In other words, LyX could be compiled
|
|
with either the current XForms toolkit, GTK, Qt, or perhaps Motif. There have
|
|
been numerous complaints about the appearance and usability of the XForms
|
|
widget-set, with which LyX has been developed; personally I don't think it all
|
|
that objectionable, but being able to choose would still be welcome.
|
|
|
|
<p>Recently Matthias Ettrich, who started the LyX project a couple of years
|
|
ago, impulsively (along with one of the main KDE developers) ported LyX to
|
|
KDE, using the Qt tool-kit. Strictly speaking, there was nothing wrong with
|
|
doing this, as the source for LyX is free. But some of the other LyX
|
|
developers were unhappy about this, as it raised the possibility of a fork in
|
|
the development, and they were informed about this port after the fact. The
|
|
source for the Qt LyX port is available from <a href="ftp://ftp.kde.org">the
|
|
main KDE site</a>; it wouldn't compile for me, but you may have better
|
|
luck (for some reason, I've never been able to compile the KDE stuff). After
|
|
a few more beta source releases binaries of KLyX will be made available.
|
|
|
|
<center><h3>Conclusion</h3></center>
|
|
|
|
<p>These are both high-quality packages, but if either of my two teen-age kids
|
|
needs to type something for school I'll steer them towards WordPerfect. It
|
|
can be immediately be used by someone familiar with MS word-processors. LyX
|
|
has a little more of a learning curve, and its dependence on a working TeX
|
|
installation is often seen as a drawback by those unfamiliar with TeX. Any
|
|
up-to-date Linux distribution includes configured TeX packages which are easy
|
|
to install. LyX has the advantage of using a more portable document format;
|
|
files saved as LaTeX source can be edited in any text editor. It's also free,
|
|
and under active development.
|
|
|
|
<p>Since the initial release of WP 7 for Linux there have been no bug-fixes,
|
|
either as revised binaries or patches (that I know of). I imagine the
|
|
resources devoted to working on the SDCorp port hinge on the quantity of
|
|
copies sold. I wonder just how many licenses have been sold; in the free
|
|
software world, program enhancements and bug-fixes tend to be proportional to
|
|
the number of users and user/developers. Commercial software doubtless is
|
|
affected in similar ways.
|
|
|
|
<p>In my case, I've been able to get higher-quality printed output with WP
|
|
than with LyX, but the reverse is probably true for users with different
|
|
printers. Luckily the demo of WordPerfect will let you determine just how
|
|
well the appropriate printer driver works with a specific system. Rod Smith's
|
|
above-mentioned web-pages are an invaluable reference for setting up printers
|
|
and fonts for WP, while the LyX documentation contains a good overview of
|
|
configuring Ghostscript and dvips for use with LyX. It's not necessarily an
|
|
either-or situation; I like having both programs available, as they each have
|
|
their strengths.
|
|
|
|
<!--===================================================================-->
|
|
<P> <hr> <P>
|
|
<center><H5>Copyright © 1998, Larry Ayers <BR>
|
|
Published in Issue 27 of <i>Linux Gazette</i>, April 1998</H5></center>
|
|
|
|
<!--===================================================================-->
|
|
<P> <hr> <P>
|
|
<A HREF="./index.html"><IMG ALIGN=BOTTOM SRC="../gx/indexnew.gif"
|
|
ALT="[ TABLE OF CONTENTS ]"></A>
|
|
<A HREF="../index.html"><IMG ALIGN=BOTTOM SRC="../gx/homenew.gif"
|
|
ALT="[ FRONT PAGE ]"></A>
|
|
<A HREF="./ayers4.html"><IMG SRC="../gx/back2.gif"
|
|
ALT=" Back "></A>
|
|
<A HREF="./mueller.html"><IMG SRC="../gx/fwd.gif" ALT=" Next "></A>
|
|
<P> <hr> <P>
|
|
<!--startcut ==========================================================-->
|
|
</BODY>
|
|
</HTML>
|
|
<!--endcut ============================================================-->
|