[Author Prev][Author Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
[Author Index (this month)][Thread Index (this month)][Top of Archive]

Re: Multiple undo (was Re: Microsoft Documentation)

Subject: Re: Multiple undo (was Re: Microsoft Documentation)
From: Dick Margulis <margulis -at- fiam -dot- net>
To: Gene Kim-Eng <techwr -at- genek -dot- com>
Date: Sat, 31 Jan 2004 15:54:42 -0500

Gene Kim-Eng wrote:

I may not have been clear enough on this point. I was referring to the
current designers, not the original ones. The original UNIX version of
Frame was quite brilliant for its time (though IMO, still not as good as
its primary competitor, Interleaf).


Yes, Interleaf is far superior. We certainly agree on that. As for your other remark, I guess what threw me off was your use of the word _designers_. I assumed that applied to the people who designed the products in the first place, not to the maintenance crews in charge of them now.




Follow-Ups:

References:
Multiple undo (was Re: Microsoft Documentation): From: k k
Re: Multiple undo (was Re: Microsoft Documentation): From: Gene Kim-Eng
Re: Multiple undo (was Re: Microsoft Documentation): From: Dick Margulis
Re: Multiple undo (was Re: Microsoft Documentation): From: Gene Kim-Eng

Previous by Author: Re: Multiple undo (was Re: Microsoft Documentation)
Next by Author: Re: Question about Word 2000
Previous by Thread: Re: Multiple undo (was Re: Microsoft Documentation)
Next by Thread: Re: Multiple undo (was Re: Microsoft Documentation)

[Top of Archive] | [Author Index (this month)] | [Thread Index (this month)]

What this post helpful? Share it with friends and colleagues:

Sponsored Ads