Skip to main content

I (Sometimes) Miss WordPerfect for DOS

In college, I wrote software documentation for mainframe users, which meant I had the opportunity to use text editors and word processors on a variety of computer platforms. I composed documentation on everything from glorified typewriters (DEC VT102 and IBM 3270 terminals) to slick WYSIWYG ("what you see is what you get") Apple Macs.

I was probably not alone in being captivated by the Mac experience. Toss in PageMaker, a few fonts, and a LaserWriter for a complete desktop publishing system, and the Mac was hard to beat. Yet, I quickly realized that I wrote better on my MS-DOS 2.1 PC running WordPerfect 4.2 from floppy disks. How could this be? The Mac was easier to use and the papers I typed looked much better on paper. Why did I type so much more, and much better, on the PC?

I didn't work on the Mac; I explored. I'd play with fonts, formatting options, and the nifty features of Word or PageMaker. I'd also play Crystal Quest, Lode Runner, and Dark Castle for hours. The Mac temptation at its worst for me. I still remember discovering Tetris on the Mac. More hours lost.

My PC was a typewriter. The sparse screen of WordPerfect, with little more than a document name and position information ("Doc 1 Pg 1 Ln 1") didn't beg to be explored. The screen was analogous to the paper in a typewriter. You had to type to fill the blank blue or black screen, the blank space demanding to be filled with words.

I am distracted easily. I think most people are, but especially creativity workers -- artists. The Mac OS, Windows, and any other GUI experiences, are like playgrounds. That is great when your job is visual design, but not so great when you need to be focused on writing.

To circumvent my nature, I started writing everything longhand on legal pads and then typing and formatting the work. I still am more productive when I can't point-and-click my way to something other than work. That's one reason I liked typing on a laptop at coffee shops or bookstores -- until they added free WiFi to the menus.

WordPerfect on a basic DOS-equipped system was the perfect typewriter. There was no multitasking (AKA multidistracting). You didn't get lost in the Web conducting "research" for your latest assignment or creative work. You typed. And it was good. I keep trying new ways around distractions, but nothing seems to match those simple DOS days.

No, I am not going to give up my MacBook Pro, Pages, Adobe Creative Suite, and thousands of fonts. I love my Mac too much. I will write about some possible options in the near future and explain how they help me reduce distractions, at least a little. The key is to be immersed in writing, so I've been using applications that attempt to recapture the spirit of WordPerfect for DOS.

For now, I'll reveal that my favorite writing application on the Mac is Scrivener. Visit Literature & Latte (http://www.literatureandlatte.com/) for more information on Scrivener. It is not a design program; Scrivener is for composing text. The full-screen mode does remind me of DOS: nothing but the text I'm writing, not even the Mac menu bar is displayed. It's a distraction-free environment.

I need to get back to a writing project. It seems I got sidetracked.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Practical Technology Skills

This blog is a revision to a column I wrote for Direct Media publications. Normally, I wouldn't repost something I wrote for hire, and I certainly don't wish to anger one of my publishers. However, since this blog is primarily accessed by one of my graduate seminars, I think the publisher will appreciate that I am extending my thoughts for educational purposes. I'm also more than willing to encourage businesses to visit the Direct Media home page . Page numbers seemed to be a half-inch lower on each successive page. I stared at the mid-term paper, handed in to me by a junior at the university, and thought back to my fights with dot-matrix printers. When I was an undergrad, my Epson FX/80 printer jammed often and would sometimes rip pages after the sprockets slipped out of alignment with the punched holes of the perforated paper. Surely the undergraduate author of this paper suffered the curse of a similarly possessed printer, I told myself. “I guess when I changed the ma...

Robots for Home: Not Yet the Jetsons

NXT Robot (Photo credit: Wikipedia ) Visalia Direct: Virtual Valley November  3, 2014 Deadline December 2014 Issue Robots for Home: Not Yet the Jetsons Rosie the robot maintained the Jetson household more than 50 years ago. To the disappoint of many of us who still enjoy the classic 1960s cartoon, Rosie remains science fiction. The only robots in our houses are round bumper cars that vacuum floors. The iRobot Roomba offers no witty banter and no sighs of exasperation. Growing up, I expected Twiki, the android that followed Buck Rogers about for no apparent reason, to become a reality. After all, Twiki didn’t do anything except carry a much smarter talking computer about his neck. Sadly, Rogers was stuck in the twenty-fifth century. All the good androids and robots seem to be way off in the future or in other galaxies. Although we have no Rosie, robots are on the rise. They build our cars, deliver medications, defuse bombs, explore planets and even perform surgeries. M...

Human Readers for Tests

As readers of my blogs know, I'm never opposed to using technology when it is an effective tool. I am opposed to the blind embrace of the latest trends without critical examination of the potential side effects. Computer-assisted grading, I can endorse to some extent because I use software to help me analyze student papers — and my own writings. But, I cannot and will not endorse any system that gives weight to the computer-based scoring. If you're a teacher, consider this petition: http://humanreaders.org/petition/index.php Now, I also want to add a critical comment on human graders. If the graders of standardized tests are using rigid scoring rubrics, they are little better than software algorithms. Bad grading is bad grading. Inflexible = bad. Again, I am not opposed to using a computer for fact checking, some plagiarism verification, and as formatting aids. Computers can and do help many of us write more effectively. But, I don't use computers to grade pape...