George RR Martin: 'Why I still use DOS'

[fjtorres]

Originally Posted by DiapDealer

Just curious. I'm not touch-typist myself.

But I still have to wonder if the whole "WordStar keyboard commands were the bomb" thing isn't mostly due to the fact that it's what you (rhet) learned first and it worked, and you're loathe to learn something new. You know ... nostalgia.

There's certainly nothing wrong with not wanting to learn anything new, but I've yet to really hear anything that doesn't have an equivalent in modern word-processing software (while staying completely away from function keys and the mouse). There's standard ctrl editing codes, and alt-key menu shortcuts that today's touch-typists can manipulate just as efficiently (after learning them, of course) I think. Not to mention the ability to SEE the exact results of your efforts on the screen. *shrug*

It's not just nostalgia.
It's also trauma.

No, seriously: learning to use those early productivity applications fully was a major effort in self-study. There were no classes (online or IRL), no video training courses, and you really needed to memorize entire new sets of commands and procedures for each application. One consequence was that people who went through the ordeal to learn one tool used it for everything they possibly could. There were people who would write formatting and pagination macros in Lotus 1-2-3 to use it as a word processor and people who would use the table functions of Wordperfect to run spreadsheet calculations.

As late as the early 90's, MSDOS users used on average less than three applications regularly. Mac users averaged nearly five because of the standard GUI, while Windows 3.x users averaged a whopping nine because of windows multitasking on top of GUI commonality and inhouse app development. (Visual BASIC really and truly was da bomb.) That and the declining hardware prices from the commoditization of computing power was the key driver behind the American productivity explosion of the 90's.

The result is that many of those early PC adopters invested so much time and effort in acquiring the skills to properly exploit those early tools that even after learning the new environments they are still loathe to leave behind those skills. It's not just Wordstar touch typing wizards or WordPerfect and Lotus Loyalists. There are entire companies running their businesses off 80's and 90's code bases.

Don't need to go too far to see how pervasive computing inertia is: companies are paying microsoft to keep on support XP systems when it would be cheaper, safer, and more effective to move to Win7 or 8.

But too many people believe that "if it ain't broke..."

GRRM is essentially a standalone operation so him clinging to a tool that has served him for nearly 40 years is essentially a harmless excentricity but at the corporate level IT inertia is costing many of them serious money and productivity. Plus exasperating Microsoft.

[DiapDealer]

I have no doubt about that. Nobody likes to start all over.

I'm just questioning what sounded like (to me) some people saying that there's some magic stuff that Wordstar can do that modern software just can't (as easily/efficiently anyway). Maybe I'm wrong.

[Hitch]

Originally Posted by DiapDealer

I have no doubt about that. Nobody likes to start all over.

I'm just questioning what sounded like (to me) some people saying that there's some magic stuff that Wordstar can do that modern software just can't (as easily/efficiently anyway). Maybe I'm wrong.

I must be the last human on planet MR that remembers that you can run almost everything in Word from the keyboard. Seriously, just because people adopted using the mouse doesn't mean that it's the House of Mouse. It just means, some people like typing over mousing, and vice-versa.

(For those with memories that have faded o'er the years of time: http://office.microsoft.com/en-us/wo...70109.aspx#BM5 . Still works.)

And, BTW: Word outputs perfectly nice RTF that plays well with others.

I know some other authors that won't budge off of Wordstar. Myself, I moved on years ago, and had trouble letting go of Wordperfect, but...jeeze, people. May I ask why any of us gives two figs what the hell any author USES? What's next, caring about what type of skivvies he's buying and wearing?

And I want to XYWriter. Most under-appreciated "writer's rpogram" in existence. Loses out all the time to Scrivener's "fancy" features (like being able to drag-and-drop chapters. Ohhhh, big whoop, you mean, JUST LIKE IN WORD for the last I-don't-know-how-many-versions?), which is grossly unfair. It's not fancy, but there's a boatload of power under that unassuming little exterior. Worth a look, and worth a donation. FAR better than most of those with colored backgrounds, saved MUSIC, galleries...works a treat, and exports beautifully clean RTF for interoperability.

Hitch

[fjtorres]

Originally Posted by Hitch

And, BTW: Word outputs perfectly nice RTF that plays well with others.

Yup. Though I prefer to run it through Wordpad first before sending it on.
Usually shrinks it something fierce.

Me, I started with PAPERCLIP on Atari 8-bit.
Moved to MS WRITE on ST and from there to MS Word. On mobile I use Softmaker Office and I dabble with LibreOffice from time to time but end up in Word for the macros.
So I understand staying with what you know. But I keep an eye out for alternatives, just in case...

[rcentros]

Originally Posted by fjtorres

Me, I started with PAPERCLIP on Atari 8-bit.

My first real word processor was Quill on the Sinclair QL (part of the office suite made by Psion for Sinclair).

[Solitaire1]

Originally Posted by fjtorres

Yup. Though I prefer to run it through Wordpad first before sending it on.
Usually shrinks it something fierce.

Me, I started with PAPERCLIP on Atari 8-bit.
Moved to MS WRITE on ST and from there to MS Word. On mobile I use Softmaker Office and I dabble with LibreOffice from time to time but end up in Word for the macros.
So I understand staying with what you know. But I keep an eye out for alternatives, just in case...

I look for alternatives too. I used MS Word for years only because the job required it, but I often found the program so frustrating at times that I won't have it on my system at home. Fortunately, I've found several other word processors that work for me, with Writer in OpenOffice.org as the one I normally use, and Jarte as an alternative.

[rcentros]

Originally Posted by Solitaire1

I look for alternatives too. I used MS Word for years only because the job required it, but I often found the program so frustrating at times that I won't have it on my system at home. Fortunately, I've found several other word processors that work for me, with Writer in OpenOffice.org as the one I normally use, and Jarte as an alternative.

When I use a word processor now, it's usually Writer in LibreOffice (basically the same as OpenOffice). At about 2005, they actually changed some of us at work to OpenOffice instead of Microsoft Office. It worked fine and there have been some really big improvements since than.

[kacir]

Originally Posted by Solitaire1

Probably the ability to:

- Access the commands without having to take your hands off the keyboard.

- Actually see the format codes within the document itself.

Use Vim or [X]Emacs to write LaTeX code. Problem solved ;-)

[rcentros]

Originally Posted by kacir

Use Vim or [X]Emacs to write LaTeX code. Problem solved ;-)

Use WordStar. Problem solved.

I'm having trouble understanding why anyone thinks there's a problem with using old tech, or old programs. People who actually used WordStar either still use it (the minute minority) or at least remember it fondly. There's a reason for that. If you haven't used it ... fine, your uninformed opinion noted. But don't expect me to take it seriously.

[rcentros]

Originally Posted by fjtorres

It's not just nostalgia.
It's also trauma.

No, seriously: learning to use those early productivity applications fully was a major effort in self-study. There were no classes (online or IRL), no video training courses, and you really needed to memorize entire new sets of commands and procedures for each application. One consequence was that people who went through the ordeal to learn one tool used it for everything they possibly could. There were people who would write formatting and pagination macros in Lotus 1-2-3 to use it as a word processor and people who would use the table functions of Wordperfect to run spreadsheet calculations.

Oh, good grief. No, WordStar wasn't that hard to learn. And there were classes. And there were good books. And there were WordStar forums and newsgroups. And no, I haven't rejected new programs because I want to "hold on to the past" and I'm not "afraid to learn something new." After all, I use Linux, which is a far cry from QDos (Sinclair QL), MS-DOS (actually DR-DOS for me), Windows 3.1, Windows 95, OS2, Windows 98 and Windows XP. Once you've learned one word processor, or one spreadsheet ... or one OS, or one insert any program category here ... you know what they're supposed to do and it's just a matter of figuring out how that particular program does it.

The reason I still like WordStar (at least remember it fondly) is because it was fast and efficient, both in the way you formatted with it and in the way you navigated in it. Where the newer WYSIWIG word processors excel is in formatting your documents -- but that also can get in the way of writing. You start fretting about the way your writing looks, rather than worrying about getting the words down. Presentation can become more important than the substance.

If you've never used WordStar, fine. But don't start with these patronizing psychological profiles when you really don't have a clue why people liked (and still like) WordStar.

[HarryT]

Wordstar was a very good word processor in its day, but that day was an awfully long time ago. Its biggest challenge was that it had to support all the different models of printer itself, rather than relying on printer support in the operating system, as modern word processors are able to do. I well remember the enormous floppy disk installation sets of Wordstar - almost all of them printer drivers.

It wasn't difficult to learn. The company I worked for used it as its main word processor for years, and I don't recall anyone having any great difficulty in using it.

[latepaul]

Originally Posted by rcentros

Use WordStar. Problem solved.

I'm having trouble understanding why anyone thinks there's a problem with using old tech, or old programs.

Really? Do you actually use any 30 year old software? If you do then you've either managed to install it on modern hardware - which can be a challenge - or have kept old hardware going, or have had to install an emulator. In addition you'll probably have to be very careful to keep an installable copy of the media around, which actually means not the original media itself unless you're willing to rely on old floppy drives. And of course you have to live with any bugs that may exist, including ones that were not relevant at the time but are exposed by fast multitasking multi-cpu systems.

All of which is doable and may be worth the effort for you and GRRM, but surely you can see why others might find all that effort a 'problem'?

[fjtorres]

Originally Posted by rcentros

If you've never used WordStar, fine. But don't start with these patronizing psychological profiles when you really don't have a clue why people liked (and still like) WordStar.

Whoa.
I'm not profiling anybody and certainly not anybody *today*.

I'm reporting well-documented facts from the early 80's when corporate IT was wrestling with issues of training, file conversions,printer drivers, and what not.
It was all over INFOWORLD, COMPUTERWORLD, PC WEEK etc.
Getting regular users up to speed was a big issue, which is where the training industry sprung from, and then getting them to switch was a bigger one as the crown of "category king" switched from one product to another. Line managers and IT had big fights over it: one side fretted over wasted time and effort retraining and the other over the costs and issues arising from supporting pockets of oddball and "deprecated" products.

That stuff *happened*.
I saw it happen and I saw it dealt with.

And the way it was dealt with was "everybody" settling on MS Office as the standard--whichover Word Oerfect, over DEC, over IBM, over Wang--which is why Office today has so much sticking power even in the face of free. We hear all sorts of anecdotes of this place or that switching to google or Open Office or what not. And it happens. But what happens most often is that IT departments stick with Office and as their companies grow, so does Office use. IT departments are absurdly conservative because they remember what things were like when they weren't.

Corporate cultures have looonggg memories.
(And apparently so does GRRM.)

[rcentros]

Originally Posted by latepaul

Really? Do you actually use any 30 year old software? If you do then you've either managed to install it on modern hardware - which can be a challenge - or have kept old hardware going, or have had to install an emulator. In addition you'll probably have to be very careful to keep an installable copy of the media around, which actually means not the original media itself unless you're willing to rely on old floppy drives. And of course you have to live with any bugs that may exist, including ones that were not relevant at the time but are exposed by fast multitasking multi-cpu systems.

All of which is doable and may be worth the effort for you and GRRM, but surely you can see why others might find all that effort a 'problem'?

Obviously, if people are using old applications they've found a way to make them work, haven't they? (I use dBase for DOS 5.0 and WordStar 7.0 in DosBox -- both a bit over 20 years old, not 30, but still ...) So why is this any skin off anyone else's nose? What difference does it make? Or do you think everyone has to do everything the same way? WordStar is (mostly was) a great word processor -- some people still love it. And DosBox is really not that difficult to set up.

[rcentros]

Originally Posted by fjtorres

Whoa.
I'm not profiling anybody and certainly not anybody *today*.

I'm reporting well-documented facts from the early 80's when corporate IT was wrestling with issues of training, file conversions,printer drivers, and what not.
It was all over INFOWORLD, COMPUTERWORLD, PC WEEK etc.
Getting regular users up to speed was a big issue, which is where the training industry sprung from, and then getting them to switch was a bigger one as the crown of "category king" switched from one product to another. Line managers and IT had big fights over it: one side fretted over wasted time and effort retraining and the other over the costs and issues arising from supporting pockets of oddball and "deprecated" products.

That stuff *happened*.
I saw it happen and I saw it dealt with.

And the way it was dealt with was "everybody" settling on MS Office as the standard--whichover Word Oerfect, over DEC, over IBM, over Wang--which is why Office today has so much sticking power even in the face of free. We hear all sorts of anecdotes of this place or that switching to google or Open Office or what not. And it happens. But what happens most often is that IT departments stick with Office and as their companies grow, so does Office use. IT departments are absurdly conservative because they remember what things were like when they weren't.

Corporate cultures have looonggg memories.
(And apparently so does GRRM.)

None of which has anything to do with the fact that -- at one time -- WordStar was corporate America's most popular word processor. That there was a lot of support for it. Or that there were college classes that taught WordStar. Or that there were online BBS and commercial forums (CompuServe was the big one) -- early on -- that supported WordStar. You need to realize that WordStar existed between the late 70s through the mid 90s -- a whole lot changed in that time period in PCs. What you're talking about mostly happened in the very early days of CP/M -- but standardization and big leaps in design and computer speed followed quickly after IBM introduced the PC in 1981. At that point classes for Lotus 1-2-3, WordStar and dBASE become more and more common. Just as now, Microsoft Office classes are common.