I get new versions of WP as they answer some particular need. X5 provided a version ready for Windows 7, when I was under pressure to upgrade to that. Before that I used version 12 - I think the compelling reason there had something to do with handling Hebrew fonts, but I can't remember. Aside from being Win7 compatible, I have seen no compelling reason to use X5 over 12. No for most things is it hugely better than 5.1 as I recall it. I like the windows "what you see is what you get capacity, and its ease of handling fonts and formatting. And as I said, along the way there have been improvements which led me from 5.0 to 6 to 7 to 8 to 9, and then to 12 and X5. My impression is that the "improvements" in recent releases have mostly been marginal.
I don't use the search for files function a lot anymore, but a quick trial says it's still fast. Don On 04/12/2011 11:12 PM, Jong wrote: > Don > Good info to know, so you say WP X5 is the version to buy? I'm still using > WP DOS 5.1 which I can't let go of because it has such a fast alphasearch > (F5)on thousands of medical information files I keep -- Word only lets you > search for the first letter (it's hard to believe anyone would put up with > Words file search if you're accessing documents constantly throughout the > day -- complete file searches WinXP or Win7 is so slow that I find it > unusable). > Jon > > -----Original Message----- > From: [email protected] > [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Don Codling > Sent: Sunday, December 04, 2011 5:48 PM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [Dataperf] Printing in WP > > > MANY years back it was WP DOS, but since then I've worked through Win > 95, XP and now 7, and many of the versions of WP from 4.2 to present X5. > > Use of shell ended with the transition to Windows. If it is a document I > print more than once in a blue moon, I may well automate the setup in WP > with a WP macro - those are immensely capable, at least if I can find > the right functions. Of course I set up my reports in DP to minimize any > further formatting needs. > > Since I work with WP every day and since I don't print a lot of > documents from DP, that has always been far easier for me than learning > the ins and outs of printing with DP Spool or other direct printing means. > > Don > > On 04/12/2011 9:26 PM, Jong wrote: >> Don: >> Thanks for bringing that up, probably the easiest way to print but are >> we talking WP DOS or WP Windows? So I guess you have a report >> generate a WP 4.2 document, then have it pickedup by WP in Windows? >> Also, issue of automating all the steps -- I don't imagine Office >> Shell macros work at the point of printing out on WinXP (or Win7?)? >> Jon >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: [email protected] >> [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Don Codling >> Sent: Sunday, December 04, 2011 1:26 PM >> To: [email protected] >> Subject: Re: [Dataperf] FAT32 vs FAT16 partitions >> >> >> No, I don't think I've ever printed from DP. It's too easy to drop >> what I might want to print into WP which has all the formatting I want >> at my fingertips. Needless to state, that shows that most of what I do >> in DP does not ever intend to come near a printer. >> >> Don >> >> On 04/12/2011 5:05 PM, Ralph Alvy wrote: >>> Have you tried printing with DP on a large drive like that? I seem to >>> remember that's when the 2gb limit showed up before. >>> >>> On Dec 3, 2011, at 3:05 PM, Don Codling wrote: >>> >>>> Ralph, I'm running DP in Windows 7 on an 80 GB partition, NTFS >>>> formatting. Before I was running it in Win XP on a similarly sized >>>> partition with FAT32. No problems either way. I think the 2 gB >>>> limit was an OS issue. >>>> >>>> Don >>>> >>>> On 03/12/2011 4:17 PM, Ralph Alvy wrote: >>>>> Can I safely assume I can run DP on a FAT32 partition, really don't >>>>> have to format it FAT16? I know DP requires the partition to be no >>>>> larger than 2gb. _______________________________________________ >>>>> Dataperf mailing list >>>>> [email protected] >>>>> http://lists.dataperfect.nl/mailman/listinfo/dataperf >>>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> Dataperf mailing list >>>> [email protected] >>>> http://lists.dataperfect.nl/mailman/listinfo/dataperf >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Dataperf mailing list >>> [email protected] >>> http://lists.dataperfect.nl/mailman/listinfo/dataperf >>> >> _______________________________________________ >> Dataperf mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://lists.dataperfect.nl/mailman/listinfo/dataperf >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Dataperf mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://lists.dataperfect.nl/mailman/listinfo/dataperf >> > _______________________________________________ > Dataperf mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.dataperfect.nl/mailman/listinfo/dataperf > > _______________________________________________ > Dataperf mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.dataperfect.nl/mailman/listinfo/dataperf > _______________________________________________ Dataperf mailing list [email protected] http://lists.dataperfect.nl/mailman/listinfo/dataperf
