KariI held off responding to your email because I thought I had little to add but most of the ensuing conversation has been about the use of XY for everything other than the purpose for which it was created in the first place, writing. I still use it (or more normally NB 9) exclusively for that and as far as I am concerned there is not a modern word processor that can touch it for speed and ease of use. I am often forced to use Word which I find a sobering experience compared with the exhilaration of XY. I agree with you about NB10 being a good product. Indeed it has most of the basic functionality of XY4 and it is quite possible to customise so that it behaves very similarly. However at the moment it does not support XPL well and many U2 functions do not work, which is why I do not use it regularly. If there were a version of NB10 available that would support U2 then as far as I am concerned, that would be a winner.Paul On 07/03/2015 14:56, Kari Eveli wrote:Let's face it: DOS XyWrite is badly dated. New word-processing applications and modern editors are very good. New hardware has made the Xy speed advantage a non-issue. DOS XyWrite is crippled by its memory architecture, it would need a rewrite and a port to 64-bit. And, indeed, it has one, albeit a very complex and specialized, namely NotaBene 10. I tried this recently, and found that it is a very capable and sleek program. But still, it is not for everyone. It is a good academic word-processing program for humanities scholars (of a certain affinity, namely biblical scholars, etc.), not a general-purpose editor like DOS XyWrite or NB 3's main editor component. I was lost in a myriad of features that I have no use for. And there are reasons not to use it in the academic world, too, as becomes apparent in what follows.