Re: TTG marketing woes

["Paul R. Falzer" prf@xxxxxxxx]

Chuck,

Thanks for your note and your kind sentiments. You have given me a lot of
room to respond. Perhaps I can organize my comments by cleaning up some
techhnical matters first, then by proceeding to a more general discussion of
XyWrite's place in the word processing marketplace.

1. You can diminish screen shimmer by running at the highest possible
non-interlacked resolution that is supported by your monitor and graphics
card and by usng the latest Windows drivers for your card. You will have a
clearer screen at 1024x746 than at 640x480, and a 15 inch or bigger monitor
will comfortably support the 1024 resolution. A 14 inch monitor will
comfortably support 800x600. In any case, the Windows default VGA drivers
are not optimum; all Windows applications will benefit by your having a good
video accelerator.

2. Regarding WinWord's defaults, you said:

>when Word can make its screen look so good, why does it come with the
>defaults set to such an awful configuration?

Good question. There other some other default settings that users should be
aware of. I will mention only a one: Under Tools - options - save, "fast
saves" is checked by default. This option is a misnomer and creates
gargantuan files. The option should be unchecked. More generally, Microsoft
significantly improved the program by two subsequent releases. If you or
anyone else wants to do serious work with the program, you definitely should
get version 6.0c directly from Microsoft (for a nominal fee). Check Help -
about to determine if you have this version.

3. >Word's downside is that it is slower--no problem if you have a fast
Pentium--
>and that it demands a lot of disk space, which gets cheaper by the day.
That's
>all?

Basically, that's all. You will find that saving and repaginating become
interminable as the size of the document grows. Version 6's "master
document" feature is broken and probably should be avoided. (Evidently, this
feature has been fixed in version 7, aka "Word 95".) Also, WinWord's
outlining features are not up to snuff and neither is its file management

Now to more general issues. . .

>I must say this program has come a long way since the last time I looked
>closely at it, I guess two years ago now, when some of our people had to
>move to Windows and we evaluated the alternatives. At that time,
>incidentally, we opted for AmiPro over Word, for reasons that are evidently
>obsolete now.

The more you get the know WinWord, the more impressed you will be with the
thought and consideration that went into its development. AmiPro 3 and
XyWrite, ironically, threw down the gauntlet. The wizards at Microsoft
picked up where the others left off and raised word processing to a new
level. Now, everyone else is playing catch-up.

>So what hope is there for XyWrite, up against Microsoft's muscle, not only in
>marketing but in the resources Gates can throw at development? Instead of
>putting its eggs in Win 95 (playing to Microsoft's strength), it would seem
TTG
>should be going after niches. I like the suggestion that it try to make
XyWrite
>THE text editor for Linux: I've yet to see anything in the Unix world that
>comes close to XyWrite, you would think there's an opportunity there. Is it
>too late to try to add more functionality to make XyWrite clearly
preferable as
>the text-preparation tool for publishing applications (as it is now for
many of
>us who have built up libraries of XPL routines, but not as it comes out of the
>box)?

IMHO, Microsoft is at the top of its game when it is a competitor and not a
leader. At one time, Lotus had the best spreadsheet, Borland the best
database, and (with apologies to fans of WordPerfect) XyWrite and Lotus had
the best word processors. Lately, Microsoft seems to be taking on Netscape
Corp., and the Internet Explorer represents what I believe is a genuine
alternative to Netscape 2. If my impression is correct, then everyone,
including the behemoth from Redmond, thrives on healthy competition.

What's the place for XyWrite in this rough and tumble world? After taking
the time and energy to learn XyWrite's approach to word processing, via its
XyWrite for Windows product, having worked with its technical support
department and others at TTG, having followed XyWrite discussions first on
CompuServe and later on this discussion list, I am anything but sanguine
about its prospects. I can think of only one other company (which will
remain nameless) that seems so utterly full of itself, while refusing to
acknowledge that it has fallen far behind the competition. Reading between
the lines, the next release of XyWin -- should it even happen -- will be the
first genuine Windows version (not the disfunctional Windofied DOS program
called XyWin 4.12). If the product is released this year, it will be about
three years behind. Meanwhile, none of the major developers is standing pat.

At one time, I was hoping that XyWrite would establish a formal relationship
with a DTP developer such as Corel! or Adobe and would become the text entry
and editing front end for FrameMaker or Ventura. Gauging by recent
developments, someone else has been thinking in similar terms, but not TTG.
Owing to several factors, UNIX is resurgent; I think that a solid, up to
date, version of XyWrite for UNIX would increase the program's
attractiveness and longevity. In any case, the key is TTG recognizing
(whether they choose to admit it publicly) that in its current form, the
product line will not survive.

First and foremost, the program must be written well. In the Windows
environment (the patform I am most familiar with), this means, among other
things, allocating memory cooperatively, so that the program doesn't freeze
or blow up and copying large amounts of text via the clipboard doesn't
product "out of memory" errors. It means moving the configuration parameters
to .INI files, so that .XY4 files can be launched from other applications
(such as a file manager). Also, it means giving users at least some of the
functionality of WinWord. Refinements in tables and columns, and adding a
section feature are three elements that immediately come to mind.

Second, the developer can capitalize on the program's principal strengths:
speed and quickness, a huge symbol set, some truly wonderful capabilities
that appeal especially to writers. here are a few ideas:

    MAPI-compliance, meaning that XyWrite could serve as the front end
for email.

    Hooks to Eudora and Pegasus, so that responses could be written
easily and quickly in XyWrite.

    Hooks to PIM's and databses.

    The ability to edit WinWord, WordPerfect, and WordPro documents in
their native formats.

    Transparent DOS to UNIX conversion (and vice-versa).

    Templates that are designed specifically for attorneys,
screenwriters, scientific and humanities writers.

    Enhanced multilingual support.

    A standalone freeware viewer.

    Graphics and equation support via other programs, with OLE 2 links.

Let me say a bit about the last item: I think everyone would acknowledge
that XyWrite's graphics capability is a mere waste of disk space. What's
happening in the marketplace is that programs are working cooperatively, so
that pieces of one are linked to pieces of another, giving users the best of
both. This is the principal idea behind Object Linking and Embedding, and it
is the guiding principle of the Windows 95/NT platforms. For instance,
suppose I want to give someone a status report about a particular publishing
project. This memo will include some standard information (e.g., TO, FROM,
and SUBJECT fields), along with tabular data that changes weekly. Producing
a report like this is absurdly simple with WinWord and Excel. I write the
standard stuff and textual content in WinWord, create the table with Excel,
and use Excel to represent the tabular data as a pie chart. Then, I paste
the table and chart into the WinWord document as OLE objects. As a result,
when the tabular data change, the content of the memo changes automatically.
I can even edit the Excel objects (e.g., add a column, change to a bar
chart) without leaving WinWord. As you can see, OLE makes it possible for
XyWrite to capitlize on its strengths and not have to become an "all things
to all people" application.

Chuck, this message is already much too long, so I'll close by answering
your last question:

>Or to put it another way, tell us again Paul just why you are still hanging
>around here?

I am learning about XyWrite, hanging out with smart people, and hoping
against hope that TTG or its successor will get it together and resurrect a
gem whose future, unfortunately, is dubious.

Paul