"Asger K. Alstrup Nielsen" wrote:
>
> > It's also been explained here, recently, that Word is *fully* capable of
> > so-called "document processing", but that it's bogged down bloatware
> > with lots of "two finger typist" support -- so that it's LyX-like features
> > are rarely used, and even if used, slowed down by all the overhead.
> >
> > This belies the whole notion that LyX is in an entirely different category.
> >
> > In fact, LyX is a word processor designed soup-to-nuts to support advanced
> > typesetting.
>
> The two most important things that makes LyX different is:
>
> 1) Ergonomic advantage because we focus on logical editing, WYSIWYM
> or whatever you'd like to call it.
>
> 2) The output quality is world class.
>
> I agree that LyX as such is a word processor, but it's also a
> document processor. I personally prefer "word processor", because
> the term "document processor" makes me think of "food processor", for
> some strange reason, although I haven't seen a recipe class (yet).
>
> Greets,
>
> Asger
Well, a friend of mine smuggled an asian apple-2e clone into Indonesia
by declaring to customs as a "Pineapple processor." I don't like the
"processor" terminology with either word or document, but I have not
come up with an alternative either.
--
Garst
