From: "briangpowell ." <briangpowellms@gmail.com>
To: "Thomas S. Dye" <tsd@tsdye.com>
Cc: Org-mode mailing list <emacs-orgmode@gnu.org>,
Ken Mankoff <mankoff@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Efficiency of Org v. LaTeX v. Word
Date: Fri, 26 Dec 2014 21:21:52 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAFm0skE9HiqozcBpnX4saptEbOeEM9ujnKKWOX4mnCRGAEtCUw@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <m2egrmdlv4.fsf@tsdye.com>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2726 bytes --]
Word is a desktop publishing system.
LaTeX is a macro language which lays on top of TeX=Tau-Epsilon-Chi~Art in
Greek
TeX is computerized typesetting that enables vector graphics--you can get
TeX to draw anything you want--you can even create your own font.
More Math journals and books you'd find in the library are created using
TeX than any other software system.
The poor kerning and severe limitations of Word are too many to number here.
Word is in a different class of software, the 2 aren't comparable at all.
Word is a poor WYSIWYG software package that is good for low quality
desktop publishing, team collaboration but can be programmed and interacted
with through VB--its useful to the general public.
LaTeX provides precision and expression; there are things you can do with
TeX that aren't possible with Word.
Members of the Free Software community (which TeX has always been a part
of) will never bow down to the Micro$oft tyranny which is so evil words
can't express the depths of their corruption--the comparison is absurd.
On Fri, Dec 26, 2014 at 6:36 PM, Thomas S. Dye <tsd@tsdye.com> wrote:
>
> ,----------------------------------------------------------------------
> | "One may also argue that given a well-designed LaTeX document class
> | file, document development speed and text and formatting accuracy are
> | significantly improved."
> `----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Apparently, the LaTeX users didn't have the benefit of a document
> class. Hard to take a "study" like this seriously.
>
> ,-----------------------------------------------------------------------
> | "preventing researchers from producing documents in LaTeX would save
> | time and money to maximize the benefit of research and development for
> | both the research team and the public"
> `-----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> All you have to lose is your freedom.
>
> All the best,
> Tom
>
> Ken Mankoff <mankoff@gmail.com> writes:
>
> > People here might be interested in a publication from [2014-12-19 Fri]
> > available at http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0115069
> >
> > Title: An Efficiency Comparison of Document Preparation Systems Used
> > in Academic Research and Development
> >
> > Summary: Word users are more efficient and have less errors than even
> > experienced LaTeX users.
> >
> > Someone here should repeat experiment and add Org into the mix, perhaps
> > Org -> ODT and/or Org -> LaTeX and see if it helps or hurts. I assume
> > Org would trump LaTeX, but would Org -> ODT or Org -> X -> DOCX (via
> > pandoc) beat straight Word?
> >
> > -k.
> >
> >
> >
>
> --
> Thomas S. Dye
> http://www.tsdye.com
>
>
[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 3793 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-12-27 2:21 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 21+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-12-26 22:47 Efficiency of Org v. LaTeX v. Word Ken Mankoff
2014-12-26 23:36 ` Thomas S. Dye
2014-12-27 2:21 ` briangpowell . [this message]
2014-12-27 14:36 ` Eric S Fraga
2014-12-27 3:26 ` Christopher W. Ryan
2014-12-28 22:45 ` Bob Newell
2014-12-27 4:27 ` Nick Dokos
2014-12-27 9:06 ` Peter Neilson
2014-12-27 14:38 ` Eric S Fraga
2014-12-27 9:48 ` Achim Gratz
2014-12-27 10:05 ` Paul Rudin
2014-12-27 10:36 ` M
2014-12-27 11:36 ` Fabrice Popineau
2014-12-28 22:43 ` Pascal Fleury
2014-12-31 18:19 ` Paul Rudin
2014-12-27 13:37 ` Daniele Pizzolli
2014-12-28 21:40 ` Efficiency of Org v. LaTeX v. Word ---LOOK AT THE DATA! Christophe Pouzat
2014-12-29 19:47 ` Thomas S. Dye
2014-12-31 16:59 ` Colin Baxter
2015-01-04 20:38 ` Efficiency of Org v. LaTeX v. Word John Kitchin
2015-01-04 21:15 ` Andreas Leha
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
List information: https://www.orgmode.org/
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=CAFm0skE9HiqozcBpnX4saptEbOeEM9ujnKKWOX4mnCRGAEtCUw@mail.gmail.com \
--to=briangpowellms@gmail.com \
--cc=emacs-orgmode@gnu.org \
--cc=mankoff@gmail.com \
--cc=tsd@tsdye.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
Code repositories for project(s) associated with this public inbox
https://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/emacs/org-mode.git
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).