I <3 Steve McConnell*
Coding Horror
programming and human factors
by Jeff Atwood

Apr 5, 2009

Almost Perfect

I'll always remember WordPerfect as the quintessential white text on blue screen application.

WordPerfect 5.1 Screenshot

For a period from about 1985 to 1992, WordPerfect was the most popular word processing program in the world on virtually every computing platform. I remember it well; the very concept of word processing was synonymous with WordPerfect.

And now I can't even recall the last time I encountered a WordPerfect document, much less anyone who still uses WordPerfect. The software is still limping along, barely, under the auspices of Corel corporation, as WordPerfect Office X4. I guess it's a testament to how quickly things change in the world of software; you can dominate the world for years, only to be relegated to little more than a dimly remembered footnote in computing history a decade later.

Perhaps that's why the online book Almost Perfect, which documents the rise and fall of WordPerfect, is such a gripping read. I clicked through, read the first chapter, read the second chapter, and ... I couldn't stop reading it!

Some of the story is predictable. WordPerfect, like many other companies at the time, never really made the transition from DOS to Windows. They didn't just bet on the wrong horse, they institutionalized a software culture that lived and died on character mode assumptions. That, plus an almost fanatical dedication to cross-platform parity -- even when the platforms they supported made little business sense -- makes the final outcome almost inevitable.

Still, there's something intriguing about the fledgling SSI corporation. For one thing, the entire business was run in an agile, almost by-the-seat-of-their-pants way. It's a bit of a David and Goliath story, how they clawed their way to success over so many formidable opponents by simply dedicating themselves to creating an excellent product, and cultivating a vibrant community around that product both inside and outside the company. But perhaps the best part is that the company was run by programmers:

We spent a lot of time in meetings going over what had to be in the product and how things should work. These decisions were made by the programmers, who sometimes had very heated discussions about what was needed. At times the three of us on the Board had to assume the role of referee. Some of the issues were very complicated, so by the time the arguments were finished and a decision was made, I usually had a headache.

It was somewhat unusual for a software company to let the programmers decide the future of its products. We were, however, a company founded and owned by programmers, where programmers were treated with an extra measure of respect. The marketing department was used primarily to sell products once they were developed, and only rarely did it get involved early enough to perform the traditional marketing role of identifying a need and defining a product to fill that need. At times this put us in the position of developing solutions before we identified problems, but it was hard to be too critical of the programmers when the company was so successful. To their credit, the programmers tried very hard to listen to our customers and to those of us in the marketing department. The programmers were smart and thoughtful and very good at protecting the best interests of the company. At times, however, they were prone to manipulate some of the data they received to fit what it was they wanted to do.

The story sort of fizzles out toward the end, as the author, W. E. Pete Peterson, is unceremoniously kicked out of the company just as WordPerfect Corporation begins to lose its hold on the market. Perhaps this is fitting: like WordPerfect itself, he doesn't go out with a bang, but a whimper.

At any rate, Almost Perfect is fantastic reading. Long out of print, it finds its own audience when self-published on the web. It's reminiscent of the very best early computer industry tales from one of my favorite books, Accidental Empires.

accidental empires book cover

I was paging through the book again after I was reminded of it, and I found this passage:

Of course, companies don't have to grow. Electric Pencil, the first word processing program for the Apple II, was the archetype for all word processing packages that followed, but its developer, a former Hollywood screenwriter, just got tired of all the support hassles and finally shut his company down. In 1978, Electric Pencil had 250,000 users. By 1981, it was forgotten.

The book was also made into a documentary, Triumph of the Nerds. I recommend both highly.

I'm not sure if all the lessons from Almost Perfect are relevant today -- but some failure patterns are timeless, and I certainly admired the way SSI bootstrapped itself while letting the employees (and more specifically, the programmers) run the company.

Posted by Jeff Atwood    View blog reactions
« I Happen to Like Heroic Coding
Sex, Lies, and Software Development »
Comments

I used Word Perfect for a home business through version 6 or so. When version 5 came out, it was a big hit for all the new features it supported, and sold tremendously. However, every new feature had a different interface; there was no central design. Great for experts, but they managed to lock out all the casual users.

A. L. Flanagan on April 5, 2009 2:39 AM

@Xepol: I don't think WP ever grokked the idea of the casual user. You could do great things with it very efficiently, after you'd been to class and learned how it worked and all the different commands. People who didn't know what they were doing could quickly produce formatting monstrosities that only an expert could clean up.

A. L. Flanagan on April 5, 2009 2:41 AM

A question to all. What successful companies nowadays are run by programmers? Do you think that some of them may repeat WordPrefect history?

In my option one very successful company nowadays is run only by programmers but it's extremely hard to imagine that it will fail. I am curious about your options so I won't write this company name.

Grzegorz Daniluk on April 5, 2009 3:31 AM

Only lawyers would be stupid enough to pay $280 for WordPerfect.

PaulG. on April 5, 2009 4:34 AM

Word processing went downhill in three stages: WordStar, WordPerfect, Word. WordPerfect was wonderful, though not nearly as wonderful as an evolved WordStar could have been. No program today does the job for writers as WordStar did. Of course, rarely are things black or white. Even Word, that monstrous kluge, has wonderful features for a writer: auto-correct, clean screen fonts, easily customized keyboard, etc. Still, there's a HUGE market waiting for the modern word-processing - scratch that, word-grinding program - a tough-to-learn app that can be run entirely without a mouse (real writers don't use mice) - and that lets writers churn words. (Bleep formatting.)
Remember how you could suggest features to WordPerfect, and danged if they wouldn't show up in the next release? Marvelous - and you could order the newly released upgrade on a - promptly delivered - floppy for $15.
WordPerfect advanced word processing in some ways - those wonderful function-key combinations that were so eminently reachable back when keyboards were designed by programmers and users, not by a jealous and vindictive Bill Gates. WordPerfect was lightning-fast at what it did. The unfortunate side was the WordPerfect took away the rich set of writer's options that WordStar gave us.
WordStar let you work creatively, using flexible, word-level tools. WordPerfect trended toward being an adorable little program for secretaries - It's not as hard! But the fun was gone. In MS Word, there's almost no fun left at all. Word is socialism: we know better - we're in control - this is how it's done.
Don't get me started about OpenOffice. It's Word with fewer bugs and crashes - granted - that sad thing is, the programmers have chosen to compete with Word. Why would you want to say We can be just as boring as you!

runbei on April 5, 2009 5:04 AM

Amen on WordStar. It was blindingly fast on a CP/M machine with 64K of RAM and a 2 MHz clock.

Lepto Spirosis on April 5, 2009 5:29 AM

I used WordPerect all throughout highschool. Here's a list of my favourite features.

Reveal codes. It's nice to know that once the formatting gets messed up, you can look at the formatting codes to fix it. Not possible in word.

Everything can be done without the keyboard. You can do things a lot faster when you never remove your hands from the keyboard. For making long documents quickly, you can't beat WP.

Which brings us to point #3. The text only UI meant that you didn't spend a lot of time messing around with fonts and formatting. You spent time writing the document. Kind of like how Balsamic lets you design a UI without wasting time on the specifics, WP let you be free to write the document, without messing around with formatting.

kibbee on April 5, 2009 7:13 AM

It seems like a lot of lawyers still use WordPerfect. I've been told that it offers more consistent formatting that is helpful when drafting legal documents.

Ian on April 5, 2009 7:33 AM

I'll readily admit to being a bit nostalgic about the old DOS days and WordPerfect, but I'd be very, very hard-pressed to say that I miss it. WordPerfect was as powerful as anything but getting it to jump through all of the hoops was also sometimes quite a Herculean effort!

Rob O. on April 5, 2009 7:34 AM

Ah, WordPerfect. No other program has ever had a thriving market of function key overlays going for it...

Kawa on April 5, 2009 7:40 AM

A lot of lawyers do still use WP. I was blown away whenever I walked into a small firm that was using WP instead of MS Office. Talk about UX shock, give a corel office users Office 2007 with a ribbon!

I really did like the simplicity of WP and my father still makes comments about WP5.1 DOS being the last computer program he was able to operate.

Adam Tybor on April 5, 2009 7:45 AM

REVEAL CODES! Ah ... good times.

Neil C. Obremski on April 5, 2009 8:06 AM

One of the things that struck me about the Almost Perfect book is the author's need to get involved with his employees' daily lives. The mingling of religion with business reminded me of the worst aspects of working for a family business, but on a huge scale since WP was so successful.

Chris Winters on April 5, 2009 8:07 AM

I almost hate to suggest this, being a programmer myself, but maybe if they'd had a few non-programmer types making strategic decisions they might have made the transition to a Windows-based world more successfully. I'm speculating here as I haven't read the book, but programmers have their own blind spots, of course (most notably, assuming that most people think like they do).

glaxaco on April 5, 2009 8:08 AM

WP was the worst pile of crap that I ever had to support. The in-document hidden format codes, which tried to bridge the gap from the visible codes of Wordstar to the outside-the-text-stream formatting of Word, caused no end of problems for users. On a long-lived, frequently edited document, if you turned on code view you'd see long strings of format codes the effects of which would return worm-hole-like out of nowhere.

Awful, awful software.

Dennis on April 5, 2009 8:15 AM

Many blind persons have told me how much they love(d) WordPerfect; in fact, many still use old versions they've saved for years. Reveal codes is an awesome feature for someone to whom WYSIWYG has no practical significance.

SusanJ on April 5, 2009 8:19 AM

Why can't latex follow those examples and just die?

Hoffmann on April 5, 2009 8:24 AM

Well Emacs and Vim aren't actually much of a far shot from WordPerfect in terms of UI, yet they are still doing fine. For WP it all boiled down to hardheadedness for better or worse.

Robert on April 5, 2009 8:24 AM

I was a faithful WordPerfect user up until 2000 or so, and I still preferred it even then--but I eventually had to bow to the tide of ubiquity of Word. Oddly enough, the thing I most loved about it was the thing that Dennis complained about: the Show Formatting mode, which let you see the markup that controlled the way your document appeared. When your formatting got messed up, it was the *only* way to fix things. In Word, when your formatting gets messed up... you're pretty much doomed.

JS Bangs on April 5, 2009 8:26 AM

So you're saying.. invisible formatting codes are evil?

http://www.codinghorror.com/blog/archives/000583.html

Jeff Atwood on April 5, 2009 8:38 AM

I remember WordStar more than WordPerfect. I've read that many fiction authors still use WordStar because the keyboard bindings were designed for touch-typists.

My mother, a professor, just made the switch from WordPerfect to Word a couple years ago, but she still has both on her computer so that she can read her old documents.

I steer clear of WYSIWYG, myself. I'd much prefer to write and edit in a plain text editor. Format later, when it's done. It's far, far more productive, and you're not locked into the bad toolset that's integrated with your word processor.

Adrian on April 5, 2009 8:40 AM

In Search of Stupidity by Rick Chapman covers the fall of Word Perfect as well (albeit much more briefly than Almost Perfect).

Chris on April 5, 2009 8:42 AM

The only time I've ever had or encountered a problem with Word (DOS or Windows) losing formatting is if the carriage return at the end of a paragraph is deleted since it carries the paragraph formatting.

Let's say your cursor is at the beginning of an italicized word and you press the delete key. In Word, the result is an italicized word less its first character. In WP, it depends on whether your cursor was before or after the begin-ital code, which you can move across using left or right cursor keys, but without visible movement on screen. If you're before it, pressing delete leaves the word the same, removes the italics and leaves the end-ital cruft in place!

Dennis on April 5, 2009 9:09 AM

I still use WordPerfect. The in-line formatting codes are a lifesaver at times.

Sure, with careless editing you can build up quite a pile of them but I know when I'm doing things that are likely to cause that and I prune them at the time.

Word does the same thing but you don't see it happen--but you can get yourself into a situation where it's all but impossible to fix the mess. More than once I've loaded up WordPerfect to fix someone's possessed Word document.

Loren Pechtel on April 5, 2009 9:21 AM

Hmmm ... they did use to say you only needed to remember one function key - F7. Spell check, print and save and quit (can't remember which was the key alone/ctrl/shift/alt). But if you just wanted to bash stuff in it worked fine.

I supported it for years on Solaris and vt220's running on Solaris, plus DOS, of course. I remember creating the keyboard map for the other Sun workstation keyboard.

It also was the first one that did tables properly, which is now so commonplace now no-one remembers how difficult it was, having to use non-proportional fonts and tabs. Unless you used latex or troff, of course (hah!).

The Windows (3.1) version was very slow and had some stupid bugs that made it spin unless you removed some formatting codes.

Ah, happy days.

Francis Fish on April 5, 2009 9:50 AM

My only real memory of WordPerfect is the Print command being shift+F9 (I think) and the Quit Without Saving command being F9. I can't count the number of people who came into the computer lab, wrote a 2 or 3 page paper then hit F9 to print.

Telos on April 5, 2009 10:22 AM

WP's hidden format codes rule. If you want to move out of the end of a code, you just hit the right arrow key. Not having this feature in either of MS and Sun's equivalents is a total pain, especially if you're typing at the end of a document (the only work around is to type everything with some dummy text at the end -- a spectacular waste of time that hopefully you'll remember to remove before printing).

And only idiots who don't know how to use a word processor edit their documents in such a way as to generate a morass of codes that do nothing. If you didn't mean to insert a code to put some text in a particular font, you should undo it. It's perfectly logical.

If you write a program so as to second-guess idiots' inputs, you just end up with something that's broken for anyone who knows what they're doing.

James D on April 5, 2009 11:00 AM

WordPerfect was the most popular word processing program in the world
In the US. Here in Israel, it was the reign of QText, a local product. It, too, was a white-on-blue DOS application. It even had a decent Windows version which was quite popular - it did Hebrew better than Word - but lost to Word around the Word97/2000 era.

I remember reading about a Ichitaro, the comparable Japanese product, overrun by Word97: http://www.google.com/search?q=Chris+Pratley+lets+talk+about+word

Jonathan on April 5, 2009 11:01 AM

Jeff, I love your blog. But for the love of god it's fugly in Chrome. For someone who has written entire posts on the benefit of learning typography, shouldn't I get nicely rendered text on a major browser with default settings? I recall it looks equally bad in Firefox.

Can anyone else help?

Jeff on April 5, 2009 12:21 PM

Jeff, I really enjoyed Almost Perfect as well. I copied-n-pasted and reformatted all the text into one e-reader friendly file for reading on my Treo. I'd be glad to send you a copy of the file if you'd like.

(I assume that's an OK thing to do to a freely available webbook)

Rick Reynolds on April 5, 2009 12:27 PM

Sometimes the business and making money and taking risks becomes more important than the product itself..

I don't like Word because it does its own tricks while I write. It is many times too hard to get the results I want.

Silvercode on April 5, 2009 12:30 PM

Jeff on April 5, 2009 11:21 AM

I`m using Chrome, too. But it's perfectly fine for me.

It must be some other problem for you.

Jnis Veinbergs on April 5, 2009 12:37 PM

Hmm... Looking back at the site again, I see Pete Peterson grants permission to reproduce the text for personal use (like I did) but asks that we not pass such reproductions around without his permission.

So, uh... sorry about that.

Rick Reynolds on April 5, 2009 12:44 PM

I was a faithful WordPerfect user up until 2000 or so, and I still preferred it even then--but I eventually had to bow to the tide of ubiquity of Word. Oddly enough, the thing I most loved about it was the thing that Dennis complained about: the Show Formatting mode, which let you see the markup that controlled the way your document appeared. When your formatting got messed up, it was the *only* way to fix things. In Word, when your formatting gets messed up... you're pretty much doomed.

-- The WordPerfect user's Lament

+1, +1, +1, +1, +1, +1, +1, +1, +1, +1

I still remember looking fruitlessly for Word's Reveal Codes and never finding them. I think I spent a couple hours one day looking and looking (circa 1998ish), growing more and more agitated. It still irks me WordPerfect effectively died and MS Word didn't have the decency to rob this very useful feature. Posers.

jared on April 5, 2009 1:06 PM

Selbst damals wurde Word für DOS häufiger verkauft.

Remember AmiPro?

GADTHRAWN on April 5, 2009 1:14 PM

Hidden deep inside Corel presentations is a little command to vectorise a bitmap image. I got some beautiful things that way, when I was too young to draw.

MS Office never surprised me like that.

DDR on April 5, 2009 1:48 PM

Funny, for me, word perfect will always be the software with ZERO interface.

I could not imagine a more hostile application than the blank screen that greeted you when wordperfect fired up. Is it running? Did the app crash? What do I do now?

No, WP died for more reasons the failure to jump to windows effectively.

It died because even edlin and notepad gave a better user experiences. WYSIWYG wasn't even required - once apps with helpful interfaces showed, the results were inevitable.

Xepol on April 5, 2009 1:59 PM

I'll never think of WP vs. Word without remembering the David vs. Goliath -like Easter Egg animation in Word:

http://www.eeggs.com/items/5036.html

Yes, Microsoft was once the underdog.

Frank Ramage on April 6, 2009 2:16 AM

In the same way we experienced the transition from control characters to wysiwyg and graphical UI, I am experiencing a transition between wiki markup and rich-text editing.

The basic need is for a presentation layer, and editing that easily and quickly manages that presentation. When we know the markup, then we absolutely control that presentation. However, when we don't know that markup, and when we don't have access to it, we struggle.

Microsoft Office is a delicious combination of too-complicated and very-powerful and very-easy.

Most wikis today are moderately-complicated and mildly-powerful and moderately-easy.

We need wikis that are not-complicated and very-powerful and very-easy.

Matt Simpson on April 6, 2009 2:44 AM

We'll be having the same nostalgic discussions about Word versus Google Docs in 10 years time.

Google Docs are awesome. Maybe you can't run a small enterprise off of a single spreadsheet, but it satisfies the 80/20 rule very well and gives you loads of useful features. I have access to my documents anywhere, I can export to pdf with ease, I have enough formatting, and there's all that built-in collaboration and change tracking.

Word Schmerd. I rarely use it anymore. Hate to sound like an old codger, but the constant interface changes without making the underlying program better just seem to be a waste of time. They have some good ideas, but the fact that you still can't export a basic document to html and not end up with reams of garbage would be pathetic were it no so funny.

lol on April 6, 2009 3:36 AM

It was somewhat unusual for a software company to let the programmers decide the future of its products.
but some failure patterns are timeless
Context.

betweenlines on April 6, 2009 3:56 AM

Is it just me or is MS word getting bloated with the latest version..
i mean ver 2003 was better ..when i switched to version 2007 ..i switched back again to ver 2003

and about WP ..it can still change the tide..its not dead yet..
prolly in a decade..

UNKNOWN on April 6, 2009 4:07 AM

@UNKNOWN: There is nothing wrong with features (until there is simply too many), but if the features don't work like I want them to, then that is a problem because the features are there but not like how I would like.

Silvercode on April 6, 2009 4:23 AM

@silvercode..So what u r saying is that the same features which are in v 2003 don't work the same in v 2007/2008.

Thats strange don't u think...i mean its MS..they would know better..
Somehow they have completely violated the law of least surprises with MS office 2007/2008/2009...
prolly because bill isn't managing the company anymore..

UNKNOWN on April 6, 2009 4:51 AM

The part in The Triumph of the Nerds where Jobs says what can I say, I hired the wrong guy is invaluable :)

costas on April 6, 2009 5:17 AM

I'm surprised that WordPerfect still exists, and it ain't cheap either! Who is buying and using this?!

I worked at the helpdesk of WordPerfect one summer (in 1992 or 1993 or so). I'd get people on the telephone asking me questions like: I've typed in a letter. What do I do now?, and people telling me they had copied the software from their neighbour when I asked them for their license number (imagine that, illegally copying the software and then having the nerve to call the helpdesk...).

Jesper on April 6, 2009 5:21 AM

@Jesper...

I worked at the helpdesk of WordPerfect one summer (in 1992 or 1993 or so). I'd get people on the telephone asking me questions like: I've typed in a letter. What do I do now?, and people telling me they had copied the software from their neighbour when I asked them for their license number (imagine that, illegally copying the software and then having the nerve to call the helpdesk...).

That is amazing...

UNKNOWN on April 6, 2009 5:23 AM

...and before WordPerfect - ok, WAY before, there was Michael Shrayer's Electric Pencil.

David on April 6, 2009 5:57 AM

Unfortunately WordPerfect for DOS, with all of its shortcomings, was much more reliable, robust, and straightforward than MS Word. Even typing a simple memo with MS Word (say, one that might want bullet points, or to have information pasted from a webpage) is a horrible foray into autoformat horrors, bloated behavior, and gross formatting difficulties. Much less if you have something like complicated footnotes, or, god forbid, non-standard page numberings or, please no, the need to insert figures into your document.

But yeah, he who is on top today will be on the bottom tomorrow. Yahoo! and AltaVista are great examples of that as well. Don't think that Google, Microsoft, whomever will be around forever — it only takes half a decade for the whole market to turn upside down.

It is extremely telling about the corporate culture behind Word (and Powerpoint, and many other MS projects) that it is easier to insert generic clipart than it is your own figures.

Shmork on April 6, 2009 5:59 AM

If you really knew what the 80/20 rule is about you would come to the conclusion that only bloatware can fulfill it.

Hoffmann on April 6, 2009 6:15 AM

And to continue whining...

I'm an academic. I use MS Word every single day. A huge percentage of my life has been spent with this one program. And yet I loathe it in just about the deepest way possible. I find it completely untrustworthy and unnecessarily difficult, all under a smug veneer of being user-friendly.

It's not just a case of using it a lot. I also use Photoshop, Inkscape, and InDesign a lot. I think they are all great. Occasionally I wish they'd do things a little better (come on, Inkscape, when are you going to have a Select by Fill and Stroke feature? get with it! don't make me have to grok XML to do something simple and powerful like that!), but on the whole they allow me to do what I want to do with a minimum of struggle. They actually improve my overall productivity — their user paradigms and features are actually intuitive, useful, and accelerate my ability to put what is in my head into a digital form.

Word does not. I find myself fighting with the program more than even using it. In many ways it makes more difficult the simple transcription of ideas, much less more complicated things. (I use a lot of figures in documents. Word is so sub-par with in-line figures that I recommend my students to just not bother. They waste hours on it and it comes out looking lousy anyway.)

Why do I put up with it? Because I haven't found an alternative yet that didn't make me re-learn another whole system that didn't seem to provide something identical (same cluttered interface, same mouse-driven GUI, same misguided ideas that they should try to make my document creator also serve as an HTML editor, same poor lack of figure support, etc.). Because compatibility of file formats matters. Because everything I have is written in MS Word. Because I keep hoping, against all evidence, that someday, SOMEDAY Microsoft will bother making Word robust and with useful features.

But then again, I haven't spent much time looking around at others, either. Because that requires investment too. OO.org Writer seems bloated, slow, and just an attempt at an open-source equivalent of a broken product (Word). Abiword looks cartoonish and unprofessional, and had compatibility problems with my old files last time I tried to use it. I'm not against paying for a word processor but I can't sink hundreds of dollars into something I don't know is going to do the job. I know Word can do the job, only because I've learned how to suppress all of its bad habits. Do I want to relearn all of that? No.

I wish I could quit you, Word. You beat up on me all day long and I, like an abused spouse, keep telling myself that maybe you'll get better, maybe you'll change. Someday you'll go too far! sigh.

Shmork on April 6, 2009 6:17 AM

@Shmork..

I feel bad for u...However this is a good opportunity to write a new word processor...and start a micro ISV...

UNKNOWN on April 6, 2009 6:38 AM

+1 for WP's reveal codes. I liked Wordstar, too.

Word is so bad that the simplest explanation is some kind of corporate malevolence -- no one can imagine that's the best way to do anything.

chernevik on April 6, 2009 6:47 AM

I have some books on WordPerfect that I've been trying to sell for years.

Robert S. Robbins on April 6, 2009 6:57 AM

uhrg! formatted text, what a nighmare era of history that was.

Thank heaven for Twitter and other text based communications where the words count ;0)

Word of mouth Mike on April 6, 2009 7:10 AM

Sadly my company still uses Word Perfect. The execs are never too happy when they receive .doc files from other companies...

Sean on April 6, 2009 7:46 AM

Programmers can make bad decisions when running a company? Rick Wagoner is relieved.

Charles on April 6, 2009 8:34 AM

You're making me feel young. I was 10 years old in 1992. I don't believe I have ever opened a document in Word Perfect (heard about it often though). Now I actually know what all those crazy people who hated Windows were talking about. Hmm. They still seem crazy though :).

Practicality on April 6, 2009 8:51 AM

I always disliked the name WordPerfect.

If it was so perfect why did they make 27 versions, 1 would have been enough ;-)


David E. on April 6, 2009 9:32 AM

reveal codes

john on April 6, 2009 9:51 AM

After almost perfect reading I am so scared. I am managing my own company with my friend in Korea. My friend is a boss, and I am developing softwares and leading other two programmers. My friend and one another coworker sale our products to customers, we have 200 customers. and every customers pay fees per every month for use our software, so we have enough income to maintain our small company. our company is so small. so we don't have any system to manage. My friend and me don't have any job experience before starting our own business. we just have only CS degree.. We don't know any knowledge of management without several thin handbooks. and We want to know how to research needs of customers. We usually accidently decide develope-plan at lunchtime during eating lunch. and I decide what we will code functions through my own needs.. yeah fortunately...our company still alive.. but our growth is stopped by appearance of some competitors recently.

Lee Jong-sung on April 6, 2009 9:51 AM

My career in computers actually began as a software instructor, teaching all-day classes for paying customers. At the time, WordPerfect 5.1 was one of the biggest classes. I quickly learned the drill: speed through most of the topics before lunch, and then spend as much of the day as possible on tabs. Tabs were a concept that most students had enormous difficulty comprehending. I'm firmly convinced most of them left the class and went right back to aligning their text with the spacebar, just like they used to do on their typewriter. (Most electric typewriters at the time had tab stops too, but they usually didn't use those either.)

KJB on April 6, 2009 10:07 AM

I've started reading Almost Perfect (after seeing your tweet about it), and am thus far most reminded of John Walker's AutoCAD story:
http://www.fourmilab.ch/autofile/

Carl Manaster on April 6, 2009 10:18 AM

I only have good memories of using WordPerfect, and hated the inevitable transition to Word for Windows... at the time, I actually preferred the non-WYSIWYG interface and clearer view of the text vs. Word's black-on-white low-res rendering.. this was before LCD monitors and ClearType and probably before TrueType and font rasterization hinting.

Luckily I code for a living in Visual Studio with fixed 6x13 font (eg. http://www.twoevils.org/html/files.html)... driving Word all day every day would drive me crazy.


Wilba on April 6, 2009 10:22 AM

WP sadly never adapted to the Windows world, which was a common mistake for very successful DOS product companies back then (such as Harvard Graphics).

WP should have kept the DOS version and made an equally desirable Windows version, one that would have handled both WP and MS Word files.

Steve on April 6, 2009 10:24 AM

I always thought WordPerfect missed a couple of golden opportunities:

1) Not getting the UX in it's transition to Windows
2) Leveraging its Markup Engine for the web

Can you imagine how much easier it would have been if we had Reveal Code?

mikekidder on April 6, 2009 10:39 AM

Did they actually connect the logical Company was run by programmers with the obvious conclusion Made bad assumptions (CLI), had bad goals (Parity) and Failed?

I'm a long-time programmer, but I'll be the first to admit that most programmers shouldn't be allowed near the product definition part of the business..

I love Linux, but ALL the problems I have (or have ever heard of) with Linux derive directly from the fact that most features/requirements are defined by programmers.


Bill K on April 6, 2009 11:16 AM

Thanks a lot for this find, Jeff. That's why I read your blog - in between makes me puke ramblings you always manage to dig out real gems. :)

shiva on April 6, 2009 11:21 AM

WordPerfect Corporation was not intended to be a social club for the unproductive. While other companies might condone many personal or social activities at the office, ours did not. Things like celebrating birthdays, throwing baby showers, collecting for gifts... calling home to keep a romance alive ... were all inappropriate when done on company time.

Yes, you would certainly not want to allow your employees to think that they were human. Might give them self-respect. Might allow them to come up with new ideas by forming friendships outside their own team. Then we won't control them! While on company time, we own you!

stingray on April 6, 2009 11:29 AM

When I had to left my WP because it was too old, I wanted the reveal codes feature to be present in the new program; so now I use LaTeX.

Jorge on April 6, 2009 12:34 PM

@Bill K

It's because Linux uses programmers instead of developers.

Just ask Steve Ballmer.

Practicality on April 6, 2009 1:00 PM

I just hate coding. It's a nightmare for me and i don't like it at all.
i don't know how you people manage to do it.. Isnt it boring to learn programming guys?

free footy on April 6, 2009 1:18 PM

I was never a WordPerfect user so I'm no cheerleader; I liked Word on DOS mostly because the key bindings were more mnemonic -- Ctrl+B for bold instead of Shift-Alt-F7 (whatever. I don't know the WP keybindings)

But I came to understand the power of WP later. WP could do things Word _STILL_ can't do (good kerning), and, like several people have mentioned, you don't waste your time formatting while you type. Get the text right first then pretty it up later.

This defeat of WordPerfet by Word was, as is so common, a triumph of style over substance; Word was prettier. I admit though, for casual users who like to mouse around and don't really care about pure productivity, Word is easier to fiddle with and make a nice little memo.

Lately I have to contend with people that attach a Word document to a wiki (we use Confluence at work) rather than just write in the wiki itself. It's worse than browsing the web and suddenly hitting a PDF file that didn't warn me it's a PDF.

Stephen P. on April 6, 2009 1:25 PM

+1 for explicit formatting codes. I would love to be able to create documents to the prettiness standards set by Word using HTML or similar. I spend too much time fixing exam papers my girlfriend prepares in MSWord and mangles; and so often, Word gives you that it worked...but I don't know how experience because its formatting logic is both implicit (no reveal codes, no equivalent of a print statement) and dynamic (the rules change in order to be more convenient, which is incredibly inconvenient).

As a Python user, I'm conditioned to believe explicit is better than implicit and to like dynamic typing. I suspect, however, that it would be very hard to work in a dynamic language without explicitness. And a lot of MS products (and clones) effectively do just that; the status of things changes depending on the context, but you can't have it cough the string literal to stdout and see what is actually happening.

This is because of MS's notion of user friendliness, which is based on a false premise - namely that computers are horrible, mysterious, capricious things that users will never understand and should not try to understand. Therefore, everything possible must be hidden behind layers of eye candy and infantilising language, and the user experience must be optimised on the assumption that nobody learns or tries to learn and therefore they must be treated like children. Therefore all the shifting rules and the fucking inconvenience of seeing any useful diagnostic information.

The premise is false because, of course, vast hordes of users have learnt that computers are horrible, mysterious, capricious things that they can never and should never try to understand from using Microsoft applications.

Alex on April 6, 2009 1:33 PM

@Stephen P.: I don't like writing on wiki itself when I want certain structure and layout. Wikis are too free form in my opinion, unless controlled, of course.

Silvercode on April 6, 2009 1:38 PM

-1 for the following:

- user hits some random F key by mistake
- WordPerfect says do you want to save your doc?
- user says no, intending to get back to editing
- WordPerfect exits and discards all the user's work.

Too much of the time it acted like a conceited, passive-agressive spouse, too sure of itself and, in communication, always leaving out bits of important context.

Joe on April 6, 2009 1:41 PM

I used several of early word processing programs, including WordStar (and later on the DOS version of MS Word which was very different from current version). Seldom I have used WordPerfect, even Windows version which now comes pre-installed on several of my computers.

My favorite which I used in college was AppleWriter, character-based program on Apple //e computer with powerful (for time) macro language called WPL (word processing language, of course). Clipboard had cumulative input/output buffer through Apple keys.

Like other early full-featured WP programs, it supported embedded commands with which you could do quite powerful things.

I always had feeling that AppleWriter was designed by programmers. It was quite logical and could do anything you imagine.

Like rest of the masses, I mainly now use Word quite alot. I like VBA, but current Word is clunky. Ribbon interface is horrible. To have a lot of capability does not mean clunky, overwhelming user interface is needed.

Vadim on April 7, 2009 5:31 AM

Oh yes -- perhaps strangest of word processors I have encountered was old Borland Sprint program, which like many Borland products was way ahead of its time and amazingly engineered. As I recall, it was like a Chameleon. It had selectable user interface, so you could choose to make it follow key commands and menus of other programs, as well as of course other languages and character sets.

Sprint also came with _compiled_ macro language, which ran macros at blazing speed! As with other Borland products even today, this program I think was more popular in Europe than in USA.

Like WordPerfect, I think this program must have been imagined mostly by programmers.

Vadim on April 7, 2009 5:41 AM

Funny to hear about the Show Formatting mode... I never used WP but have to use Word sometimes; but I never liked Word. Couldn't quite find out what's wrong with Word, but true: it's the invisible formatting. You never know what Word actually does in the background, or what kinds of formatting tags it sneakily inserts. Some mode to show these texts would be nice - but OTOH DocBook or HTML are just fine as well, and they have a built-in Show Formatting mode :-)

Btw. to see what invisible formatting tags can do, just look at a HTML file that was heavily edited in Dreamweaver or the likes... Lots of empty tags sprinkled throughout the text.

Also, from the Revealing Errors Department: it's fun to see a Word document or Outlook-composed mail in some other viewer (OpenOffice or Thunderbird) and notice some oddly-sized whitespaces in the text - it shows the places where a seemingly-casual phrase was heavily edited by the author, and the invisible markup stayed in the text...

Oliver on April 7, 2009 6:28 AM

The state legislature in Kansas still uses WordPerfect as part of the standard software package on all its computers. The reason: a collection of WordPerfect macros designed by a (now former) employee designed to automate or simplify a number of common tasks for secretaries, committee secretaries and administrative assistants. The problems:

1. Corel's way of dealing with the printers seems to conflict with the settings of some of the newer printers, resulting in tech support running up and down flights of stairs to reset and/or unjam printers.

2. Most of the tasks automated in the macros can be done as well or better by existing functions or addons in OpenOffice or Microsoft Office, both of which are also installed on all the machines. (Our tax dollars at work - two paid programs duplicating the functionality of one already present free program).

Software often hangs on in businesses and government not because it is better, or even good, but because it is entrenched. That's been the foundation of Microsoft's marketing strategy for years, and it works.

My personal preference is for OpenOffice, both due to the open source nature of the development, and for general ease of use.

Richard on April 7, 2009 8:40 AM

REVEAL CODES FOREVAH

thrax on April 7, 2009 10:57 AM

Thanks for the link to the book. I'm on chapter 11 and he's really starting to come off like an SOB. But it's an entertaining read.

Matt T. on April 7, 2009 12:19 PM

@next: Yes Word gets things done, eventually. But before that it is too hard to learn the tricks how I get exactly what I want and even after that Word has some peculiarities. Some issues might get fixed by tweaking some settings, but I think the user shouldn't need to tweak settings to get the software as usable as possible. And by usable I don't mean restricting the user into a granny mode only, though it shouldn't be a configuration session either.

One thing I don't like is that the style list has all the styles I don't need in it plus on-the-fly styles messing things up. In OpenOffice it is better but clumsier and maybe not even better after all. Word 2007 messes styles even more by introducing new ways that distract the user. I just want my styles, not square boxes with previews in box nor in text. I know how my headers look like.

Other things are the table of contents, numbering schemes, and tabs between picture number and picture text and table of figures layouting. They are too hard to use if I want something custom done.

Sure I could first learn how to use the software. But if I open a program without reading the manual and click buttons and menuitems, I would expect they do what they say they do and in a usable manner. And what comes to table of figures, it isn't fun if I need to build it up configuring piece by piece starting from tab positions, widths, and counts before the toc gets straight, if there is more than 9 items in it.

Silvercode on April 7, 2009 1:23 PM

The perfect text editor for me would something like, oh, say, Dreamweaver. I could just drop inline formatting in XML-ish code (but designed around formatting text), with a quick screen-flip to view the formatted text.

Basically, WP reveal codes except that's the default interface, and you have to hit a shortcut to see the formatted text.

But in the end, I'm going to stick with InDesign if I need a nice, professionally formatted document. And if someone would come up with a .doc(x)/.xls(x)/.ppt(x)/.pub(x)-to-Postscript program, I'd drop my Office 2k7 install discs in the trash can.

rndmnmbr on April 9, 2009 6:25 AM

++1 Reveal Codes. I used WP 5.1 for over five years. I curse Bill Gates with every inch of my existence sometimes when I'm trying to format a Word document and I can't get things to line up exactly where I want them. With WP, I could hit the 'Reveal Codes' function and see EXACTLY where things went astray. Codes were a life and time saver. With Word, you go to paste an image on a page and it ends up somewhere else in the document. Totally frustrating. Tables in Word... can be another hellish experience.

WordPerfect took a bit of time to learn, but once you got the hang of things, you could really make it shine. Much like the IDE's of today. How many people curse Eclipse over VS or Netbeans? In the 80's, Word was but a dream. Access was a communications package. How may would be frustrated with DBASE II/III if they had to go back to the 'dot' prompt? The thing is, you get comfortable with the technology of the day. When there's a paradigm shift, you either jump on, or watch it drive off! I would still be comfortable using WP today as I would with anything DOS based.

How many knew that 'EDLIN' is still in Windows XP? LOL

Bob on April 9, 2009 7:24 AM

+1 Reveal Codes - anyone who ever worked with them had a huge head start when it came to picking up HTML.

Whatever benefits and faults WP might have had as a product - and as a company - it was never going to be easy to compete with the word processor that came almost by default on every PC. As with most Microsoft products, Word's success wasn't so much about quality as it was about ubiquity.

And yes, Word is a bitch of a program that always assumes it knows better what you want to do than you do yourself. It was tolerable up to 5.1, but what some people see as friendliness in its design comes across more as passive aggressiveness to me.


jneilnyc on April 9, 2009 12:26 PM

The takeaway I got from reading Almost Perfect (and it really is a must-read, impossible to stop once you start) was that Mr. Peterson had so little self-awareness about his own management style. By the end, I felt like I'd just read something in the style of the unreliable narrator, esp when I got to that part already pointed out by a previous poster. That same paragraph also included medical and dental appointments as things which were inappropriate, and the part when he wished aloud that he could fire anyone who came in that day with a negative attitude really threw me for a loop. By the end, when he notes that a completely anonymous WP employee, over a year after the fact, sends him hate mail that rejoices in his departure, it is only fitting that he admits to being more upset that the person used WP materials and time to send the letter, than what was in the letter itself.

Seriously...when the company workers get together a petition to have you fired? You've got some issues you really ought to work out. Wow.

And I was a WordStar person myself, though there were plenty of bootleg copies of WP floating around back then. I just wish that MSWord would stop trying to read my mind, because it does it so poorly.

mharvey816 on April 13, 2009 11:31 AM

@MHarvey: Exactly. While I enjoyed the parts where Peterson explained some of the rationales for WP product behavior, I just couldn't get over his crashing naïveté and arrogance--the exact combination of things he accused Microsoft of having. I believe we call this dramatic irony. He is entirely focused on details. In Myers-Briggs jargon he's an off-the-charts Sensor, and a Judger to boot, so he doesn't see any need to change or adapt because his way has worked just fine. His approach, dare I say, seems more religious than anything else.

Other posters call WordPerfect Corp. a successful company--I disagree. I think their success was entirely accidental. They had no strategy, none at all, Peterson especially. He seems perpetually surprised by things that anyone reading beyond the first few chapters of a management book[1] would expect in the course of a company's development.

[1] I say this because, earlier in the book, Peterson mentions that reading the first few chapters of a book on the subject and then surging forward is exactly how the board of directors attacked basic management problems, like, oh, paying taxes.

David in Chicago on April 16, 2009 9:41 AM

I'm a former programmer who is now in law school. The firm I work at uses WordPerfect, and I must say that I really, really like it as compared to Word. It doesn't contain a lot of bloated, worthless features. It's somewhat unintuitive at times, but I think that's because I've been living in a MS Office world for so many years.

But most of all, Reveal Codes. I love being able to control every single little bit of my word document. When I get home and have to do something in Word, I curse every single time I try to start formatting.

Unfortunately the other lawyers/clerks who don't have any coding background don't get it. They ask me to come over and help them format their WP document and I'm shocked when they don't even bother to have Reveal Codes open. Mine's open all the time. It's almost like they don't understand that inbetween all the letters, there's a bunch of stuff going on.

Mike on May 31, 2009 1:53 PM

It doesn't support unicode even now! So outside of US and Europe, It is useless!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WordPerfect

I guess MS word caters to normal people all over the world, instead of advanced users in a niche market, which is what windows is doing [in OS] compared to Apple Mac.

Fakrudeen on June 5, 2009 3:56 AM

I still use WordPerfect 5.1, love it.

Anonymous on July 28, 2009 3:33 AM

Thanks for the link to the book. I love history especially when I can relate to it. I work at Omniture whose main office currently occupies two of the buildings on the old word perfect campus. Every few months I take a look around and wonder what it was like here in the word perfect heydays. It's great to read a bit of insight into just that.

Kalon on February 6, 2010 11:17 PM

With 4.2 you could support quite a few users on a minicomputer. 5.1 ran nicely on PCs But 6 was dreadful. I am a slow typist, and I found the cursor spongy with 6 on what really was a perky little machine for that day. At that point they looked doomed.

But I wish that Word made nested levels of lists easier to use.

Tabs! One of the amusements in 8th-grade typing class was to hit the button that reset your buddy's tab stops as you walked to your seat.

used it on February 6, 2010 11:17 PM

Verify your Comment

Previewing your Comment

This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.

Working...
Your comment could not be posted. Error type:
Your comment has been posted. Post another comment

The letters and numbers you entered did not match the image. Please try again.

As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.

Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.

Working...

Post a comment

Content (c) 2009 Jeff Atwood. Logo image used with permission of the author. (c) 1993 Steven C. McConnell. All Rights Reserved.