I'm not familiar with TeX, though a quick search turned up the TeX Users
Group site, http://www.tug.org/ which gives a good history of it (been
around since 1980!). It sounds kind of like "(not necessarily internet) HTML
for mathematicians" ???
Max, I agree with your stated shortcomings of MS Word, but I'd still like to
plug my all-time favorite software, WordPerfect (no, I don't and never have
owned stock or had any other commercial interest in it) which is readily
available, relatively inexpensive, multi-purpose, and powerful. And it also
recognizes that graphics files a user might want to put in a document can be
large and/or plentiful, and provides the ability to link to image on disk.
----- Original Message -----
From: Max Timchenko <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Wednesday, January 17, 2001 2:52 PM
Subject: Re: [PCSOFT] Graphics Program
> Hello Toomas,
>
> Sunday, January 14, 2001, 6:24:52 PM, you wrote:
>
> >> Adobe Pagemaker and Quark Express are the two leading
> >> desktop publishing applications...
> On Windows and Mac. The scientific and mathematical community, as well
> as those who run other OSes, prefer the TeX family of typesetting
> tools.
>
> TP> Most of work can be done on modern word processor programs.
> TP> Few weeks ago i see in TV even Math textbook made compleatly in
> TP> Word 2000.
> This wouldn't be a good idea. Microsoft Equation isn't too good with
> formulas as TeX, and large documents take forever to open in Word.
> IMHO Word is great for small (1-10 pages) documents, above that you
> need something more serious.
>
> TP> When you write book, add photos and drawings last. If you add them
> TP> when you write , it makes computer slow and can crash.
> Only if working in WYSIWYG environment like Word that includes all
> photos and drawings into the document. TeX, for example, links them
> externally so I can add photos on-the-fly without any performance hit.
>
<snipped>
PCSOFT's List Owner's:
Bob Wright<[log in to unmask]>
Drew Dunn<[log in to unmask]>
|
