Re: SmartWords

[leslie bialler lb136@xxxxxxxx]

Frank Kenneth B. wrote:
>
> OK, here goes. Because of the long absence of any word from us I'm sure
> there will be quite a bit of activity in response to this post, but I
> can take it.
>

Ah so, you're still there. No truth, then to the rumour Peter Angelos
had tapped you to become the Orioles' GM, then?


> Our current plan is to have the SmartWords beta disk available for
> shipment the week of November 8. Sometime in the next week or so we'll
> put an order form on our web page, and I'll let you know when that's
> there. The cost will be $15 with 1 word processing filter, and $49 with
> the whole package.


Splendid. Is it fair to say that those of us who placed our orders last
April will be served w/o having to reorder now?

> Also included (which you don't have to run) will be
> a SmartWords application for drafting of a couple of documents used in
> relation to Intellectual Property-- probably a non-disclosure agreement
> and maybe a simple employment agreement. This application is designed
> to show what SmartWords really does, and if anyone is interested in
> using it to develop other products we are happy to discuss it with you.
> The engine produces applications that can be run on a desktop Windows
> environment, or over the Web.
>

I'll give it a whirl.


> In response to some questions I have been asked, the SmartWords editor
> is functionally very similar to the Nota Bene product, although Nota
> Bene has done more with the interface as it relates to certain
> functions. From the commmand line, however, they are more or less the
> same. I am not in a position at this time to comment on our future
> plans for this product, but you are welcome to use it if you so desire.
>

As I had assumed.

> We also would hope to enable downloading of the install from our Web
> site later in the month, and that will be free for the $15 CD product.
> The full filter version will still be $49.
>

Indeed.

> You may ask why we haven't said more about this over the last several
> months, and that is a fair question. Primarily it has been because I
> was not happy that we had not been able to pull this together for you,
> and didn't want to make any further promises we wouldn't keep. We had
> other pressing priorities that had to be dealt with first, and weren't
> in a position to devote the bandwidth to getting this done properly
> before then.
>

Understandable, but I think we are too. We (well I, anyhow) would have
understood.

> This is not a money-maker for us, so you won't hurt our feelings if you
> don't want to try it. But we are happy to make this available to you if
> you are interested.
>

We know this.

> Sorry for the delay.
>

Sure.

--
Leslie Bialler
Columbia University Press
lb136@xxxxxxxx
> http://www.columbia.edu/cu/cup