Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.
 

Re: This startup disk will not work on this macintosh model.

Expand Messages
  • thomasbriant
    ... Dear Somniferous1: Did you install John Rethorst s Sheepshaver-WordPerfect kit? It s called SS-WP.ZIP and it s in the Links section of this Yahoo group. It
    Message 1 of 14 , Aug 1, 2007
      --- In wordperfectmac@yahoogroups.com, somniferous1 <no_reply@...> wrote:
      >
      > This is the error code I get after I installed OS 7.5.3 on Sheepshaver.
      >
      > It goes on further to say..
      >
      > Use the latest Installer to update this disk for this model.
      >
      > How do I get the smiley face I had with the OS 8.6 CD (that came with my G3).
      >
      > Is there any hope for me? So much of what is written is over my head.
      >
      > Thanks.
      >
      Dear Somniferous1:

      Did you install John Rethorst's Sheepshaver-WordPerfect kit? It's called SS-WP.ZIP and it's
      in the Links section of this Yahoo group. It works! It sets up Sheepshaver with an OS and
      Word Perfect.

      Or did you install OS 7.5.3 from a CD/floppy in your posession?

      I have to know this in order to help you.

      Tom Briant
      Editor, MacValley Voice
    • Frederic W. Erk
      One year ago I switched to classic Macintosh for word processing, which is essential to my research work. I have installed Microsoft Office 2001 suite, as well
      Message 2 of 14 , Aug 2, 2007
        One year ago I switched to classic Macintosh for word processing,
        which is essential to my research work. I have installed Microsoft
        Office 2001 suite, as well as Corel WordPerfect 3.5e and Nisus. I
        would be interested to hear about fellow users and their opinion
        about those software. Whereas Microsoft does provide for standard
        performance, I have found Nisus and WordPerfect more appealing. Is
        that because Microsoft graphical user interface is so mediocre, or is
        it because WordPerfect is indeed a superior word processing piece of
        software?
        --
        Frederic W. Erk
        http://fredericerk.com
      • Geoff Gilbert
        Dear All I have WP3.5e and I also have WP Office X3 under Parallels. I have installed all the converters for X3 and the Conversion utility includes WPMac
        Message 3 of 14 , Aug 2, 2007
          Dear All

          I have WP3.5e and I also have WP Office X3 under Parallels. I have
          installed all the converters for X3 and the Conversion utility
          includes WPMac 3.1-3.x. I have even saved as Wp3.x in WPMac to see if
          that would work. Whatever I do, X3 tells me that the file is of an
          unknown format. Ideas?

          Geoff
        • manfred_dogg
          WordPerfect is a much superior product. The formatting is more intuitive and flexible. If you have ever used a H-P calculator, the Reverse Polish Notation
          Message 4 of 14 , Aug 2, 2007
            WordPerfect is a much superior product. The formatting is more
            intuitive and flexible. If you have ever used a H-P calculator, the
            Reverse Polish Notation they use is much superior to the standard
            method used by most calculators. Of course RPN is not as intuitive as
            the standard method, but its superiority comes from the ease of use
            and flexibility it offers.


            --- In wordperfectmac@yahoogroups.com, "Frederic W. Erk"
            <discuss.ihsd@...> wrote:
            >
            > One year ago I switched to classic Macintosh for word processing,
            > which is essential to my research work. I have installed Microsoft
            > Office 2001 suite, as well as Corel WordPerfect 3.5e and Nisus. I
            > would be interested to hear about fellow users and their opinion
            > about those software. Whereas Microsoft does provide for standard
            > performance, I have found Nisus and WordPerfect more appealing. Is
            > that because Microsoft graphical user interface is so mediocre, or is
            > it because WordPerfect is indeed a superior word processing piece of
            > software?
            > --
            > Frederic W. Erk
            > http://fredericerk.com
            >
          • hacky8sack
            ... Well, in the worst case scenario, you could save as RTF in WPMac and then open that with X3. Steve
            Message 5 of 14 , Aug 2, 2007
              --- In wordperfectmac@yahoogroups.com, Geoff Gilbert <Geoff@...> wrote:
              >
              > Dear All
              >
              > I have WP3.5e and I also have WP Office X3 under Parallels. I have
              > installed all the converters for X3 and the Conversion utility
              > includes WPMac 3.1-3.x. I have even saved as Wp3.x in WPMac to see if
              > that would work. Whatever I do, X3 tells me that the file is of an
              > unknown format. Ideas?
              >
              > Geoff
              >
              Well, in the worst case scenario, you could save as RTF in WPMac and then open that with X3.
              Steve
            • Randy B. Singer
              ... You are asking on a WordPerfect discussion forum. What do you suppose that the answers will be here? You might want to ask this question on a more general
              Message 6 of 14 , Aug 2, 2007
                On Aug 2, 2007, at 3:17 AM, Frederic W. Erk wrote:

                > One year ago I switched to classic Macintosh for word processing,
                > which is essential to my research work. I have installed Microsoft
                > Office 2001 suite, as well as Corel WordPerfect 3.5e and Nisus. I
                > would be interested to hear about fellow users and their opinion
                > about those software. Whereas Microsoft does provide for standard
                > performance, I have found Nisus and WordPerfect more appealing. Is
                > that because Microsoft graphical user interface is so mediocre, or is
                > it because WordPerfect is indeed a superior word processing piece of
                > software?

                You are asking on a WordPerfect discussion forum. What do you
                suppose that the answers will be here?

                You might want to ask this question on a more general Macintosh
                discussion list, but even then I predict that you will get answers
                similar to asking a bunch of men whose girlfriend was the best.
                Users are very attached and loyal to their Word processor of choice.

                Trying to be objective, I think that WordPerfect/Mac and MS Word are
                in a class that no other word processors for the Macintosh can
                approach. If WP/Mac hadn't been discontinued, and it incorporated
                the patches and additions made available since, I think that there is
                no doubt that it would be the best word processor on the Macintosh
                platform. Especially so if it had been in continuous development all
                this time and it took advantage of running on OS X. WP/Mac's one big
                failing is that it never had really good WP to Word translators, in a
                world where the Word file format is the de facto business standard
                for exchanging editable documents.

                I think that at this point Microsoft Word has more features than WP/
                Mac, and it became a really good product with the introduction of the
                first OS X version. It is now dead stable, and the interface, with
                situation-specific palettes, is quite a bit nicer. Word is different
                than WP/Mac in the way that it works, so a former WP/Mac user isn't
                likely to immediately find the interface easy to use or to their
                liking. Word also does not have the same level of formatting codes
                that WP does, and that is a big deal to many former WP users. The
                next version of Word, due anytime now, will have a heavily updated
                interface,
                <http://www.useit.com/alertbox/wysiwyg.html>
                <http://www.microsoft.com/office/preview/uioverview.mspx>
                and a new default file format that is no longer proprietary.
                http://www.computerworld.com/newsletter/0,4902,106437,00.html?nlid=PM

                There are a bunch of other word processors for the Macintosh:
                http://www.emailman.com/software/wordproc/mac.html
                None are as powerful as Word and WP/Mac, but if any of them have
                sufficient features for your needs, and you like their interface,
                then there is no reason not to use them. But many folks cannot
                consider anything other than Word or WP/Mac because they need any of
                a number of advanced features, such as document tracking, redlining,
                table of authorities, etc.

                I think that the bottom line is that the word processor that is most
                "appealing" is the one that most appeals to you. Other factors, such
                as features, developer support, ease of use (from your perspective),
                and cost, will also probably figure into your decision as to which
                word processor is best for you.

                After all that...have I just fed a troll?


                ___________________________________________
                Randy B. Singer
                Co-author of The Macintosh Bible (4th, 5th, and 6th editions)

                Macintosh OS X Routine Maintenance
                http://www.macattorney.com/ts.html
                ___________________________________________
              • Frederic W. Erk
                ... I am very sorry about that question on this specific forum. I just registered myself to two new discussion forums, the first being devoted to using Apple
                Message 7 of 14 , Aug 3, 2007
                  >
                  >You are asking on a WordPerfect discussion forum. What do you
                  >suppose that the answers will be here?

                  I am very sorry about that question on this specific forum. I just
                  registered myself to two new discussion forums, the first being
                  devoted to using Apple Macintosh in Humanities - to which I thought
                  my message was posted -, and the latter being yours. So please accept
                  my humblest apologies for this bizarre introduction of myself.

                  >
                  >WP/Mac's one big
                  >failing is that it never had really good WP to Word translators, in a
                  >world where the Word file format is the de facto business standard
                  >for exchanging editable documents.

                  This is an issue, indeed. As I am new to WordPerfect 3.5e and have
                  many Word files, would you mind explaining or at least pointing me at
                  a guide to converting Word files into WordPerfect.

                  >
                  >I think that the bottom line is that the word processor that is most
                  >"appealing" is the one that most appeals to you. Other factors, such
                  >as features, developer support, ease of use (from your perspective),
                  >and cost, will also probably figure into your decision as to which
                  >word processor is best for you.

                  I am particularly interested in the foreign languages Thesauri and
                  dictionaries. After some fiddling with WordPerfect I have the feeling
                  that the Word support is superior (which is to be expected from a
                  more recent and world standard application.) For instance, using
                  WordPerfect in French and checking the spelling resulted in many
                  false errors, as if WordPerfect could not understand grammatical
                  situations or plurals.

                  Another issue is the compatibility of WordPerfect 3.5 with the
                  Windows X3 application suite.

                  >
                  >After all that...have I just fed a troll?

                  I don't think so, first because I have more important things to do
                  than playing that kind of games, and second, because WordPerfect
                  would not be the ideal platform for sounding the troll alarm. I hope
                  that answered your question.

                  --
                  Frederic W. Erk
                  http://fredericerk.com
                • Thomas J. Rostafinski, Ph.D.
                  Geoff, when I save as WP 3.x AND add the file extension .wpm, WPWin 11 opens the files, though formatting is not always conserved very well. I have had better
                  Message 8 of 14 , Aug 3, 2007
                    Geoff, when I save as WP 3.x AND add the file extension .wpm, WPWin 11
                    opens the files, though formatting is not always conserved very well.

                    I have had better luck with saving as WPWin 6,7,8, and adding the .wpd
                    extension, of course. WPWin 11 seems to do better with the formatting then.

                    I cannot imagine that X3 would have abandoned even that level of support
                    for WPMac files, but maybe. X3 should continue to open whatever you
                    save as WPWin, though. Let us know if any of these ways work for you. Tom

                    ===================================
                    Thomas J. Rostafinski, Ph.D.
                    Licensed Clinical Psychologist
                    1140 Lake Street, Suite 508
                    Oak Park, IL 60301-1053
                    (708) 848-1611
                    fax (708) 848-1436
                    tjrostaf@...
                    ===================================

                    > WP Office X3 importing WPMac
                    > Posted by: "Geoff Gilbert" Geoff@...
                    > Date: Thu Aug 2, 2007 4:08 pm ((PDT))
                    >
                    > Dear All
                    >
                    > I have WP3.5e and I also have WP Office X3 under Parallels. I have
                    > installed all the converters for X3 and the Conversion utility
                    > includes WPMac 3.1-3.x. I have even saved as Wp3.x in WPMac to see if
                    > that would work. Whatever I do, X3 tells me that the file is of an
                    > unknown format. Ideas?
                    >
                    > Geoff
                  • J. C. Sarmiento
                    fwiw we have continued to use wp/mac within os x using the classic environment, and use maclinkplus as a translator to or from ms word or any other word
                    Message 9 of 14 , Aug 3, 2007
                      fwiw we have continued to use wp/mac within os x using
                      the classic environment, and use maclinkplus as a
                      translator to or from ms word or any other word
                      processor. maclinkplus works well and its not too
                      expensive, thus enabling us to remain ms-free.
                      --- "Randy B. Singer" <randy@...> wrote:

                      jc sarmiento, sf

                      >
                      > On Aug 2, 2007, at 3:17 AM, Frederic W. Erk wrote:
                      >
                      > > One year ago I switched to classic Macintosh for
                      > word processing,
                      > > which is essential to my research work. I have
                      > installed Microsoft
                      > > Office 2001 suite, as well as Corel WordPerfect
                      > 3.5e and Nisus. I
                      > > would be interested to hear about fellow users and
                      > their opinion
                      > > about those software. Whereas Microsoft does
                      > provide for standard
                      > > performance, I have found Nisus and WordPerfect
                      > more appealing. Is
                      > > that because Microsoft graphical user interface is
                      > so mediocre, or is
                      > > it because WordPerfect is indeed a superior word
                      > processing piece of
                      > > software?
                      >
                      > You are asking on a WordPerfect discussion forum.
                      > What do you
                      > suppose that the answers will be here?
                      >
                      > You might want to ask this question on a more
                      > general Macintosh
                      > discussion list, but even then I predict that you
                      > will get answers
                      > similar to asking a bunch of men whose girlfriend
                      > was the best.
                      > Users are very attached and loyal to their Word
                      > processor of choice.
                      >
                      > Trying to be objective, I think that WordPerfect/Mac
                      > and MS Word are
                      > in a class that no other word processors for the
                      > Macintosh can
                      > approach. If WP/Mac hadn't been discontinued, and
                      > it incorporated
                      > the patches and additions made available since, I
                      > think that there is
                      > no doubt that it would be the best word processor on
                      > the Macintosh
                      > platform. Especially so if it had been in
                      > continuous development all
                      > this time and it took advantage of running on OS X.
                      > WP/Mac's one big
                      > failing is that it never had really good WP to Word
                      > translators, in a
                      > world where the Word file format is the de facto
                      > business standard
                      > for exchanging editable documents.
                      >
                      > I think that at this point Microsoft Word has more
                      > features than WP/
                      > Mac, and it became a really good product with the
                      > introduction of the
                      > first OS X version. It is now dead stable, and the
                      > interface, with
                      > situation-specific palettes, is quite a bit nicer.
                      > Word is different
                      > than WP/Mac in the way that it works, so a former
                      > WP/Mac user isn't
                      > likely to immediately find the interface easy to use
                      > or to their
                      > liking. Word also does not have the same level of
                      > formatting codes
                      > that WP does, and that is a big deal to many former
                      > WP users. The
                      > next version of Word, due anytime now, will have a
                      > heavily updated
                      > interface,
                      > <http://www.useit.com/alertbox/wysiwyg.html>
                      >
                      <http://www.microsoft.com/office/preview/uioverview.mspx>
                      > and a new default file format that is no longer
                      > proprietary.
                      >
                      http://www.computerworld.com/newsletter/0,4902,106437,00.html?nlid=PM
                      >
                      > There are a bunch of other word processors for the
                      > Macintosh:
                      > http://www.emailman.com/software/wordproc/mac.html
                      > None are as powerful as Word and WP/Mac, but if any
                      > of them have
                      > sufficient features for your needs, and you like
                      > their interface,
                      > then there is no reason not to use them. But many
                      > folks cannot
                      > consider anything other than Word or WP/Mac because
                      > they need any of
                      > a number of advanced features, such as document
                      > tracking, redlining,
                      > table of authorities, etc.
                      >
                      > I think that the bottom line is that the word
                      > processor that is most
                      > "appealing" is the one that most appeals to you.
                      > Other factors, such
                      > as features, developer support, ease of use (from
                      > your perspective),
                      > and cost, will also probably figure into your
                      > decision as to which
                      > word processor is best for you.
                      >
                      > After all that...have I just fed a troll?
                      >
                      >
                      > ___________________________________________
                      > Randy B. Singer
                      > Co-author of The Macintosh Bible (4th, 5th, and 6th
                      > editions)
                      >
                      > Macintosh OS X Routine Maintenance
                      > http://www.macattorney.com/ts.html
                      > ___________________________________________
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      >
                    • Geoff Gilbert
                      Tom Saving as WP 6,7,8 worked and even preserved the cross-referenced footnotes. Strangely, though, it lost the indent for indented paragraphs. However, given
                      Message 10 of 14 , Aug 4, 2007
                        Tom

                        Saving as WP 6,7,8 worked and even preserved the cross-referenced
                        footnotes. Strangely, though, it lost the indent for indented
                        paragraphs. However, given the number of cross-referenced footnote
                        numbers I usually have to manually insert, I'll take this over saving
                        as Word 6 any day (no cross-referenced footnotes and no indents).

                        Thanks

                        Geoff

                        >Geoff, when I save as WP 3.x AND add the file extension .wpm, WPWin 11
                        >opens the files, though formatting is not always conserved very well.
                        >
                        >I have had better luck with saving as WPWin 6,7,8, and adding the .wpd
                        >extension, of course. WPWin 11 seems to do better with the formatting then.
                        >
                        >I cannot imagine that X3 would have abandoned even that level of support
                        >for WPMac files, but maybe. X3 should continue to open whatever you
                        >save as WPWin, though. Let us know if any of these ways work for you. Tom
                        >
                        >===================================
                        >Thomas J. Rostafinski, Ph.D.
                        >Licensed Clinical Psychologist
                        >1140 Lake Street, Suite 508
                        >Oak Park, IL 60301-1053
                        >(708) 848-1611
                        >fax (708) 848-1436
                        >tjrostaf@...
                        >===================================
                        >
                        >> WP Office X3 importing WPMac
                        >> Posted by: "Geoff Gilbert" Geoff@...
                        >> Date: Thu Aug 2, 2007 4:08 pm ((PDT))
                        >>
                        >> Dear All
                        >>
                        >> I have WP3.5e and I also have WP Office X3 under Parallels. I have
                        >> installed all the converters for X3 and the Conversion utility
                        >> includes WPMac 3.1-3.x. I have even saved as Wp3.x in WPMac to see if
                        >> that would work. Whatever I do, X3 tells me that the file is of an
                        >> unknown format. Ideas?
                        >>
                        >> Geoff
                        >
                        >
                        >
                        >
                        >
                        >Yahoo! Groups Links
                        >
                        >
                        >
                      • David Patterson
                        AND add the file extension .wpm My experience has been that one should always add the DOS extension to any file name which will be opened on a PC. That s the
                        Message 11 of 14 , Aug 4, 2007
                          "AND add the file extension .wpm"
                          My experience has been that one should always add the DOS extension to
                          any file name which will be opened on a PC. That's the only way the poor
                          thing has of knowing what to do with the file.

                          David Patterson
                        • Randy B. Singer
                          ... You might want to check out this utility, which I find invaluable: Spell Catcher http://www.rainmakerinc.com/ ___________________________________________
                          Message 12 of 14 , Aug 6, 2007
                            On Aug 3, 2007, at 12:45 AM, Frederic W. Erk wrote:

                            > I am particularly interested in the foreign languages Thesauri and
                            > dictionaries.

                            You might want to check out this utility, which I find invaluable:

                            Spell Catcher
                            http://www.rainmakerinc.com/

                            ___________________________________________
                            Randy B. Singer
                            Co-author of The Macintosh Bible (4th, 5th, and 6th editions)

                            Macintosh OS X Routine Maintenance
                            http://www.macattorney.com/ts.html
                            ___________________________________________
                          • Frederic W. Erk
                            ... Thank you for this very interesting suggestion! -- Frederic W. Erk http://fredericerk.com
                            Message 13 of 14 , Aug 6, 2007
                              >
                              >You might want to check out this utility, which I find invaluable:
                              >
                              >Spell Catcher
                              >http://www.rainmakerinc.com/

                              Thank you for this very interesting suggestion!
                              --
                              Frederic W. Erk
                              http://fredericerk.com
                            Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.