From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Bob Newell Subject: Re: Efficiency of Org v. LaTeX v. Word Date: Sun, 28 Dec 2014 12:45:22 -1000 Message-ID: <87d273o0l9.fsf@bobnewell.net> References: <549E26E9.9080900@binghamton.edu> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:53378) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Y5MYQ-0000qi-Bp for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Sun, 28 Dec 2014 17:43:19 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Y5MYM-0003nU-VD for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Sun, 28 Dec 2014 17:43:18 -0500 Received: from mail-pd0-f179.google.com ([209.85.192.179]:35572) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Y5MYM-0003nF-P6 for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Sun, 28 Dec 2014 17:43:14 -0500 Received: by mail-pd0-f179.google.com with SMTP id fp1so16099481pdb.10 for ; Sun, 28 Dec 2014 14:43:13 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <549E26E9.9080900@binghamton.edu> (Christopher W. Ryan's message of "Fri, 26 Dec 2014 22:26:33 -0500") List-Id: "General discussions about Org-mode." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-orgmode-bounces+geo-emacs-orgmode=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sender: emacs-orgmode-bounces+geo-emacs-orgmode=m.gmane.org@gnu.org To: Org-mode mailing list The "study" is an obvious diatribe couched in (poorly done) scientific method. It almost seems like these researchers have at some time been required to use LaTeX and are angry over it. I will agree that LaTeX is slower and less efficient than LibreOffice (I don't have Word on any of my computers but the argument I suppose is the same), if your only interest is pounding out text of a first draft. But the "study" didn't allow for the effects of proofreading, etc., and all the things that are always done when producing something for publication. I expect that the differences in grammar and orthographic errors will be insignificant. A 30-minute test is ridiculous. More meaningful would have been end-to-end time to complete a given document. Maybe then Word would have still been faster; I don't know. But that doesn't tell the whole story by any means, including the very important matter of long-term storage in a non-proprietary format. -- Bob Newell Honolulu, Hawai`i * Sent via Ma Gnus 0.12-Emacs 24.3-Linux Mint 17 *