Alternative to Microsoft Word?

I just went to check out OpenOffice and it seems great and all, but it's 93 megs. Any smaller programs out there that can draw tables and such for documents? That's really the only good thing about MS WOrd that I know of and the entire reason I want it.

LaTeX

OMG 93 MEGS THATS LIKE HALF MY HARD DRIVE

Suck it up. That's your best bet. (Incidentally, MS Office installs off a CD. You think there's <100MB on it?)

MS works 4.5?

>>2
I already use that on my pen0r, if it works on my compUt0r that would be great.

I just assumed the program would be a bloated memory hog if the installer alone is 90 megs. But I'll give it a shot eventually I guess if nothing else.

Wordpad.exe

Use Google docs from Opera!

www.opera.com

>>2

LaTeX or troff, depending on your taste.  Note: this is not a troll, these are fine text processors and at least your documents won't be obsolete when the file format changes with the next version of Word.

Because program size on the HDD = Program size on memory?
I've left openoffice on this pc idling for about a week now. Memory usage hasn't gone above 50mb. At the moment it's just sitting comfortably at 35.

>>5
LaTeX installer is several DVDs large.

>>1
winword kinda sucks.
oowrite is even worse. More bugs and insanity.
Use a text editor to edit text. Like Kate.

>>8
70's abandonware aren't word processors okay

>>12
Truth

>>12 and >>13 obviously don't know how books (y'know? those things made from paper) are written.

>>11
winword kinda sucks.
oowrite is even worse. More bugs and insanity.
Use a text editor to edit text. Like vi.

>> fixed

>>14
Books are for old fogeys, I browse text/plain files.

>>12

8 here.  I know they aren't word processors, that's why I called them text processors.

Discussion of abandonware is totally irrelevant.  Your OS vendor should support whatever troff variant comes with the system (Apple delivers groff).  If you've a Linux support contract, they should support LaTeX for you too.

And if you've got something against the 70s, I presume you're using the NT Kernel (lol bastard child of VMS) which was developed in the 90s rather than a UNIX-like.

If Windows NT didn't happen to suck, I'd say an OS designed with 1990s hardware and concerns in mind would be better than Unixsaur every-fucking-body replicates over and over instead of coming up with an OS designed for today.

notepad

>>18
obviously doesn't know anything about os design. os design is inherently tricky business if you want to be flexible.

>>18
UNIX is designed for yesterday, today, and tomorrow. why do 99% of supercomputers run on UNIX or linux? BECAUSE IT _STILL_ WORKS BETTER THAN ANYTHING ELSE. and in 10 more years, i bet that will still be the case.

and in 30 moar years, that will still be the case.

fixed for truth

Draw Table use Lotus123
For Writing Document use WordStar

The problem isn't Unix itself, but all the shit that comes with it. To name a few:
- FHS
- Bunch of core utilities with non-uniform parameters used to write hacks that /should/ work, for most cases, I think, I suppose
- sh/bash/zsh/pretty much all shells
- Hippies stole my . in PATH
- Lol freedom: the second you want to run three applications in X you realize you require libraries for two desktop environments (which go as fat as virutal file systems), three toolkits, several internationalization suites, and a million random libraries (which you usually need to provide yourself), including the ever popular librandomshithahaiwrotealibraryiamgod-2.65.1.3-beta-Distro-6.0.33 .

>>24
- anyone who is even within a mile of a windows registry cannot say anything abuot fhs
- unix core utilities kick ass, they do everything and without needing a gui.  all the file management utilies like cp, rm, mv etc. have recursive options and ALWAYS WORK, unlike Windows "File is in use by another process" shit.
- bash kicks ass, much better than cmd.exe or even that powershell shit.
- if you really want . in your path why don't you fucking add it.  learn about that bash thing you hate so much.
- you got us on the last point, except for one thing: gui's are for morons.  xterm or gtfo.

Haha, so you wanna argue about *nix do ya?

It's been beaten to death: http://4-ch.net/code/kareha.pl/1117884645/l50

>>26
Would sir, like some french crys to go with his waaaaaamburger, afterwards I shall you a waaaaaaambulance

gb2/macfaggotry oh wai-- Macs run a BSD *nix variant, I guess that won't work. So...

Please turn in you computer with the guard on your way out the door, he'll be happy to exchange it for the dumb terminal that better suits your mental capacities. Thanks and have a nice day.

Ummm..Notepad? Wordpad? They are basic sure but useful as hell...I never use anything else and get along just fine.

>>25
BTW, I like Linux more than Windows. But I'm not a fanboy about it, I admit it's far from perfect as well.

- anyone who is even within a mile of a windows registry cannot say anything abuot fhs
I hate the Windows Registry almost as much as the FHS. However, Windows being shit doesn't justify *nix being shit.

- unix core utilities kick ass, they do everything and without needing a gui.  all the file management utilies like cp, rm, mv etc. have recursive options and ALWAYS WORK, unlike Windows "File is in use by another process" shit.
Sure they do, but they could be MUCH cleaner and MUCH moar consistent. Also, the "file is in use" is not a problem with Windows Explorer (which sucks BTW) or Windows console commands or GNUWin32 or whatever, but a stupid design decision of an OS that sucks.

- bash kicks ass, much better than cmd.exe or even that powershell shit.
Again, CMD is shit, but that doesn't justify Bash being shit. Don't be a fanboy about it. Can you really write Bash scripts without puking at the syntax?

- if you really want . in your path why don't you fucking add it.  learn about that bash thing you hate so much.
Already did; I was joking about the overall paranoid policy, not this particular issue.

- you got us on the last point, except for one thing: gui's are for morons.  xterm or gtfo.
GUIs suck for most things, but you kinda want one for most Internet browsing (few sites are elinks/w3m friendly), sites with images, fappage, and image editing.


>>26
All valid, very good points.

>>28
Do you even do any real work, let alone write programs? If you're on Windows, get PSPad. It's free and powerful. You can also use FAR's console editor with a few plugins. FAR is the only "real user" console tool that's better on Windows than anything you have on Linux (sadly!).

>>18
backwards compatible, user friendly, flexible (aka powerful). choose two.

Again, CMD is shit, but that doesn't justify Bash being shit. Don't be a fanboy about it. Can you really write Bash scripts without puking at the syntax?
FUCKING SIGNED

There's something very wrong with people who like Bash.

If you don't like a syntacical(sp) language perhaps perl is for you. Lack of formal syntax, however, is why perl is fails hard as a programming/scripting language.

Uh, >>32, do you have any idea what "syntax" is?

Of course Perl has a syntax, moron (helo 2 u context-sensitive grammar). All computer languages do. Even Forth. The computer wouldn't be able to understand the code if it didn't.

meh read someone else's perl trash or yours a year after you wrote it... the syntax is revative as to be non-fuctional

>>34
I often hear that, but I have yet to see it. Maybe it's because of the quality of the coders I associate myself with, or maybe I've never dealt with a large enough Perl codebase. So I'm not convinced.

I'll happily point out the stupidities in Perl's syntax, and some of its semantics, but readability outside regex... no.

If I wanted to bitch about readability, I'd start with Python. The language itself is great, but its community has too many dolts who don't believe in comments or documentation. No other language community seems to suffer this affliction, even the ones who also take agile coding seriously. Other than Ruby. Go figure.

>>30
Powerful (flexible) and usable (user-friendly), hands down.

>>35
Perl is unreadable and it's full of retarded design decisions. Some of its features are great, while others make it look like a toy that's little better than Bash. You take long reading the code trying to solve the ambigueties according to page 43 of fucking how do I DWIM. DWIM is shit.

I've worked with Python code. I agree that the language is great, and that there are many in the community who still haven't discovered comments, which pisses me off, but I've also found nice code.

Perl is unreadable
Again, not that I've seen.

and it's full of retarded design decisions.
Yeah, verily.

I keep hoping Perl6 will fix some of the more idiotic ones, but it's been in development what... seven years now? If it wasn't for Pugs it'd be effectively dead, IMHO.

2007 is the year of the Linux desktop, of Perl 6, of PHP 6, of Python 3000, ...

The year of the Linux desktop written in Perl 6.

LOOK ASSES, BASH IS A FUCKING SHELL.  YOU AREN'T SUPPOSED TO WRITE REAL PROGRAMS IN IT.

SAME WITH PERL, EXCEPT THERE'S NO INTERACTIVE PROMPT.  PERL 6, NOW WITH NEW INTERACTIVE MODE!!