Jules Bean <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Those of you who don't read newsgroups might nonetheless like to scan > the following thread, which mentions LyX (Andre and Lars and I defend > it to the death ;) > > >http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=en&threadm=3C681D71.8E9BF939%40active-tex.demon.co.uk Heh. Some major elitist boobs on that froup, eh? This particular quote of Kastrup is especially telling: > My main point of criticism is not that I found LyX not yet > to be where you would want it to be, but rather that where > you would want it to be is not what I would consider useful > for my purposes. And therefore, according to Kastrup, it's a total waste of time. Sheesh. My experience -- it took three good trys to get used to the way that LyX works. Eventually, something clicked. The Kastrups of this world go in with the mindset that it's lame, it's broken; and then they throw the most complex examples that they can find at LyX in hopes that it *does* break so they can bash it some more. I took the time to learn how to use LyX effectively, and I find that it's major limitation stems from LaTeX's restricted page layouts. IOW, LyX isn't the problem, LaTeX is. For me, anyway. -- Larry Kollar k o l l a r at a l l t e l . n e t "Content creators are the engine that drives value in the information life cycle." -- Barry Schaeffer, on XML-Doc
