View Single Post
Old 05-23-2014, 12:54 AM   #96
rcentros
eReader Wrangler
rcentros ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.rcentros ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.rcentros ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.rcentros ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.rcentros ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.rcentros ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.rcentros ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.rcentros ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.rcentros ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.rcentros ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.rcentros ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.
 
rcentros's Avatar
 
Posts: 7,894
Karma: 52566355
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: Boise, ID
Device: PB HD3, GL3, Voyage
Quote:
Originally Posted by FatDog View Post
An Artist gets used to his tools and is loath to change - I can respect this.

If an author was writing techno-thrillers or SciFi and was not using modern tools, this would be more controversial.
I can't buy that. First, several SF writers do (or did) use WordStar. Second, writers rely on research, not on being the characters they're writing about. It's like saying a writer would have to be an addict to write about an addict. Mel Gibson (who, despite his problems, was (is) a pretty decent actor) was asked about one of the "method actors" who had to lose weight or live on the street to "get into his part." His response, "hasn't he ever heard of acting?"

Again, whatever works, I guess. But I don't think any word processor gets words down any faster or slower than WordStar -- so it really doesn't matter which is more "modern."
rcentros is offline   Reply With Quote