Bill Gates is a Boy Wonder to me; I wonder what he was doing in 1973 outside school in Harvard – studying law? (He dropped out.) I don’t know him from Adam Smith, but I know he’s a Word Wizard, known that for years, beginning with his alpha Word 1 circa 1987. His Word 4 was a pain in the ass – you sit long hours to come up with a manuscript worth perusing; his Word 5 was the beginning of a paradigm shift that the world sat up and took notice of; his Word 2003 is genius I now recognize and love to the max; it’s his Word 2007 I have a problem with, a complete stranger to me and, you know, I don’t talk to strangers. The full essay

Continuing Education In PowerPoint Presentations

Making love is beautiful, but these rules apply: Do not fold, spindle or mutilate! Don’t mis-use, dis-use, mal-use. Amuse, don’t abuse. If you’re making love only to the body, not body and soul, you’re pathetic.

If you have never made love, you’re welcome here – you may, however, fail to appreciate the subtleties of the fine art of making a PowerPoint presentation, or of making love. What you will see is our one-night stand. If you’re thinking of your one-night-stand (or of Chuck & Larry), you’re not thinking of love: The full essay

You want to use Microsoft PowerPoint well enough, yes? My professional advice is (and it’s free): Begin with Microsoft Word. I’m a joker, but PowerPoint is no joke – if you don’t get it, you become a jester in a court of no appeal.

I’m writing this, meaning from scratch to finish, as on a car, in Word 2003, my sweetheart of a software till death do us part, from morning to evening of today, October 11, Thursday in Manila. I’ll now make my point clear; in fact, I have several power points to make: The full essay

Bill Gates is acting strange. Microsoft is no stranger to computer science research and development (R&D) – but agriculture R&D?

Today, Bill Gates is into crop research, specifically the Tropical Legumes II Project, in faraway Sub-Saharan Africa, no relation to Microsoft Windows or Office 2007. He might have been talking to officials of the International Crops Research Institute for the Semi-Arid Tropics (ICRISAT) based in Patancheru, India, perhaps even officials of the Centro Internacional de Agricultura Tropical (CIAT) based in Cali, Colombia; International Institute for Tropical Agriculture (IITA) based in Ibadan, Nigeria. The three are implementing Legumes II. The full essay

Anil Dashes A Reply To Frank Hilario’s

Anil Dash writes 15 January 2007 in his self-titled blogsite these not-very-flattering lines:

I found Frank Hilario’s rant entitled Microsoft’s Mr Bill Gates And The Boy Who Cried Worp to be largely incoherent, but from what I could deduce, he thinks my assessment of Microsoft Office 2007 is off-base. Actually, he says:

If you can’t beat them, don’t join them; instead, change the rules of the game. That’s what Worperer Microsoft did with Word 2007, Paul Thurrott (2006, cited) says. Yes. Anil Dash (2006, cited) says: ‘By radically changing the user interface in Office 2007, Microsoft made the riskiest bet in the history of commercial software. And I think they’re going to win the bet.’ Wanna bet?

So, here’s another idea, also from me: Go get a fresh tablet of stone and etch on it the idea of an entirely new word processor. Worperers of the world, unite! You have nothing to lose but your worps!

Once you’ve lost your worps, you may enjoy Rafe’s musings …

You may appreciate more my reaction below if first you browse my article published by the American Chronicle.

Now then, I find Anil’s dash of a response intriguing in many ways:

(1)
He didn’t even bother to put in the complete and correct title to my article, and the source. These are: ‘Software IQ. Microsoft’s Mr Bill Gates And The Boy Who Cried Worp,’ published by the American Chronicle 12 January 2007. It doesn’t need high IQ to notice ‘Sofware IQ,’ does it? My article had a hidden agenda: Test your software IQ. His was a rush to judgment. You can’t read me if you’re in a hurry; I don’t write for busy people.

(2)
He calls the whole of my Software IQ article a rant, meaning a violent, loud, or extravagant speech or bombast (American Heritage Dictionary). Extravagant, yes: I was extravagant in my praise of Microsoft Word (XP and 2003); I called Word 2003 the best word processor today, bar none. Violent? No. I didn’t use any violent or abusive word; neither name-calling nor swearing is my style. But I did say that the new Microsoft Word (Word 2007) drives me crazy! I explained why it did. And I said that with Word 2007 Microsoft doesn’t quite hack it. I denied Microsoft’s claim of simplicity; I said I couldn’t see The Ribbon at all (‘The emperor has no clothes!’); I said the tab-menu (Ribbon) is comical and incongruous; I said there was no logic to the menu; I said it was a horrendous oversight to rename the Style sheet as Home. My writing was loud? Maybe. I can’t write a short article, and I’m very passionate about what I write, especially about Microsoft Word. Bombastic, meaning having exaggerated dignity or being pretentious? I don’t think so. I present all the facts that I am familiar with, and explain them lengthily, and then I conclude. In the article, I do not pretend to know more than I am able to see.

(3)
He calls my Software IQ largely incoherent. If you read in a dash, oh yes, my article is largely incoherent. Early on, you will trip on your own toes if you don’t mind that I invent words to help me say what I want to say: worp (word processor), worper (worp user), worperer (worp creator), Worder (user of Word), worping (word processing).

Let’s see now;  here’s the very first paragraph of my Sofware IQ:

Shockingly innovative is Microsoft’s Office 2007, and I’m convinced that its appearance is evidence that its rival, OpenOffice 2, is winning the game with its suite of application programs equivalent to those of Office 2003, which means that what is 4 years older is as good as new. Office 2007 with a unique user interface is in response to the redoubtable challenge of OpenOffice; Microsoft’s Gambit is: If the enemy is game, change the rules of the game. I’d say Microsoft has high IQ.

The clues are there: shockingly innovative, unique user interface, OpenOffice 2 equivalent to Office 2003, winning the game, change the rules of the game.

If you don’t understand the first paragraph, I forgive you. But right in the middle of my article, I give what I call Frank’s IQ Test For Word Processors, where I enumerate 57 basic and advanced word processing commands (based on Word 2003) and dare you to look for each of them in Word 2007 and time yourself – I am sure you will have a hell of a time. Indeed, Word 2007 fails my Software IQ test. In fact, Word 2007 makes life much more difficult for expert and novice users of Word alike.

My Software IQ is a rant that is largely incoherent, eh? Maybe Anil Dash doesn’t like my rating scale (from Good to Bad): Expert, Professional, Advanced, Neophyte, Trying Hard. Or maybe I’m really Forrest Gump.

Word Processing: A History Of An Idea Time Forgot

When I look at the word processing (worping) genius that went into the making of either OpenOffice Writer 2006 (which imitated Word 2003) or Microsoft Office Word 2007 (which imitated no one, being revolutionary in its interface), I’m unhappy. Neither comes close to my idea of an excellent, not to mention a genius word processor (worp).

I started worping 21 years ago, on 29 December 1985, with WordStar. Worping has since been my bread and butter, you might say. Reading ‘A Brief History Of Word Processing’ by Brian Kunde, written in 1986 (2001, stanford.edu/), reminds me of my idea, at least 10 years old, that what is wrong with worping is that it has not grown up from the genius of processing words to the genius of processing ideas. The personal computer (PC) used as a worp is still merely a glorified typewriter. Because that was what worping was designed to be. Writes Dan Bricklin, who helped create one of the early word processors (worps) in the middle of the 70s (1998, gooddocuments.com/): ‘In all cases, the design goal of the word processor was to produce a final paper output. The initial users were not even the authors; they were the typists and typesetters.’ A worp was meant to be a mechanical program, that’s all.

According to Brian, worping is 42 years old, delivered as a newborn baby in 1964 by IBM with the name Magnetic Tape/Selectric Typewriter with which typed material could be edited on tape without the need for retyping, as well as filed and printed. Not a bad beginning at all.

The modern word processor has since grown in program functions, size and complexity. Yet, in the early days (1980s), when worping was simple enough, brilliant writers like Ray Bradbury rejected outright the modern worper that came with the PC because they could not see its use beyond manipulating words. That rejection is a continuing one to this day. Here is part of the text of a recent interview by Gavin J Grant with Ray Bradbury (2000, booksense.com/):

Do you still use a typewriter?
Oh yes. I don’t have a computer. A computer’s a typewriter, so I don’t need two. I just need one.
I know you have a mixed relationship with technology …
No I don’t. All I ask is that you tell yourself why you need a thing, and then you use it. Why do you need a telephone? Well, we’re using one right now. Why do you need a computer? Well, if you’re in business, a computer is a very important part of your business, especially if you’re selling things to people and you have 2-300 sales in a day. At the end of the day your computer adds it up for you – that saves a heck of a lot of time, doesn’t it? So you look at each machine and say, ‘How do I do this?’ If you use it for stupid or silly reasons … like the Internet is often used by men – it’s a toy. You can play with a toy, but don’t play with a toy all the time. That’s all I’m saying.

Ray Bradbury, a genus of a genius, born 1920, can’t see beyond worping and the games that most people play with the PC. He probably thinks you can’t abuse a typewriter. He wrote (typed) the first draft (titled The Fireman) of Fahrenheit 451 at the basement of the library of the University of California Los Angeles on a rented typewriter in 9 days; the final version was published in 1953 and became his most popular work of fiction (2007, sparknotes.com/).

In contrast to Ray Bradbury, equally famous science fiction author, another genus of a genius, born 1917, Arthur C Clarke (2001: Space Odyssey) welcomed worping and told the creators of WordStar, the first word processor (Mary Bellis, inventors.about.com/):

I am happy to greet the geniuses who made me a born-again writer; having announced my retirement in 1978, I now have six books in the works and two (probables), all through WordStar.

To each age and genius his own typewriter. ‘Word processing,’ say Paul E Ceruzzi & Burton Grad (2006, computer.org/), ‘today is without a doubt the most-used of all PC applications.’ Those geniuses who don’t worp don’t know what they’re missing!

WordStar came out in 1979, Microsoft Word in 1983. I don’t know about the United States, but I personally know that WordStar was the #1 worp in the Philippines in much of the 1980s. When WordStar 4 came about, we WordStar worpers rejoiced: among other things, I remember it had programmable shortcuts (macros) that made life easier for typists and editors, not to mention authors like me who were their own editors.

About the history of Microsoft Word, we are told (PP, 4 January 2007, microsoft.com/):

Word was originally the ‘Bravo’ product, brought to Microsoft from Xerox Palo Alto Research Center by Charles Simonyi in 1981. The following year, Microsoft officially launched Word’s development team. When the first version was released in 1983, it was the first word processing product to feature the WYSIWYG design philosophy that what appears on screen should appear in print. It was the first program to feature line breaks, bold-faced and italic fonts onscreen, and typeset-quality printing. (WYSIWIG – What You See Is What You Get)

WordPerfect was released for the PC (WordPerfect 2.2) in 1982, the first version being for the Data General minicomputers (wikipedia). It soon overtook WordStar as the most popular worp. I remember it with its beautiful fonts and graphics; I also remember it as the most difficult worp to learn.

There are other worps that I remember: Ami Pro (Lotus), MultiMate (Borland), DisplayWrite (IBM). I never tried them though I read about them. I was happy with WordStar; Jerry A Canonizado (JAC to friends) convinced me to try WordPerfect, but I found it too complex for me. Bernie Quimpo pushed me to try Microsoft Word and there I found much fulfillment as writer, editor, publisher.

Such fulfillment will never be complete until the millions of people who use word processors (worpers) learn that worps are meant for handling not only words but thoughts. 2Learn.ca says it very well (2001, 2learn.ca/):

The use of the computer as a word processor fits with constructivist theory, as it allows for flexibility according to ability, cooperation with others, and construction, as well as reconstruction, of each student’s thoughts and experiences.

Genius! This is the most brilliant, the most illuminating declaration I have ever read on what seems to be a complex idea working with simple idea, constructivism working with word processing. It’s a clue to genius, if any genius is listening. Here’s another clue, quoted on that webpage: ‘How do I know what I think until I see what I say?’ Worping is almost 30 years old. The geniuses of worping – Microsoft (with its Word), Corel (WordPerfect), IBM Lotus (Word Pro) and even OpenOffice.org (Writer) haven’t a clue.

The Dhaka Project / The Dangka Project

The image you see here, from NicoleB (flickr.com/), reflects the story of The Dhaka Project, that of a stewardess named Maria Conceicao (Nicole is the one in the photograph, but their features are similar, except that Maria smiles a lot) who has been raising money for the poor to start a new life in Bangladesh in the form of a school, housing, teaching facilities for adults and so on. It has inspired me to call my iWord initiative The Dangka Project – it just happens that the street where I live right now is called by that name, Dangka. There are no coincidences, are there?

Now, here are the parallels between these two projects:

I have had a glimpse of Word 2007. I don’t need the élan of Word 2007 for me to love Microsoft Word; even with OpenOffice Writer closing the gap in features, even with WordPerfect in the wings and Lotus Word Pro offering competition for Lotus eaters and Bill Gates haters, I’m no admirer of Mr Bill Gates myself, but to me Word is still the greatest up until today, 31 December 2006. But in 2007, I shall bid goodbye to Word, I shall be using iWord, my kind of Girl Friday, my kind of word processor (worp) that is intuitive, that is not memory-hungry (I mean, I don’t have to memorize anything), that I understand and that, most of all, understands me. And best of all, I’m going to create it myself – from out of the bowels of Microsoft Word. Thanks but no thanks, Mr Bill Gates.

Months before this, I wrote OpenOffice.org suggesting the features of what I call iWord but I guess it was too late – they can’t reprogram OpenOffice Writer in 50 days like I can reprogram Word in 50 minutes. On second thought, they can, if they can program-in Word’s ability to recreate itself.

All of which doesn’t stop anyone from creating an entirely different worp that is not unlike my iWord, or using some other paradigm that makes a worp a user’s fancy, not a programmer’s delight. I wouldn’t mind. Why because I would then have the priceless satisfaction that my suggestion was worth the website paper it was written on.

In fact, I built my own prototype of iWord several years ago, and I demonstrated it to the staff of a big government office at Los Baños, an agency attached to the Department of Environment & Natural Resources, Philippines – for free. This is the Ecosystems Research & Development Bureau (ERDB); they still have that capacious auditorium which has very good acoustics. I used their desktop computer and their LCD projector, and had a good time. No, they didn’t buy anything from me – I wasn’t selling any. I was just selling the idea that nobody needs to be awed by the hardware and the software. They know me there; I used to be their Chief Information Officer when the office was still the Forest Research Institute (FORI). They know I’m self-taught about writing, editing, publishing, computing, even photography.

My point is this: iWord isn’t virtual; iWord is as real as the expression ‘as Filipino as buko pie’ (coconut pie); I’m into it already. Am I thinking of selling it? No. iWord is not a product or a service; it’s more an attitude. And if you have that attitude, you can create your own iWord yourself. And how do you do that? Easy. I will teach you here, on this site. For free – that would be when you reach the point where you know what you want in your own copy of Word. After all, iWord is built upon Microsoft’s Word. I’m endorsing Word because it has the ability to redesign itself according to the wishes of the user who knows better.

If you want the best of Word, you have to understand worping first of all, the essentials. So now, let me explain what iWord is all about so that you will know what your word processor should be able to do for you without getting you embarrassed for ignorance. In the next 7 sections of this blogpost, I shall explain one by one the menus of iWord.

31 December 2006

iWord Help!

Help!↔File↔Revise↔Access↔Nicen↔KnoMore↔Surf

Help! That interjection captures the alarm that a first-time user or a beginner worper feels inside, so let Help! really guide him from zero knowledge to first-time pluck. That’s the reason I put what I call my shortlist of commands that will make any amateur look like a professional in 34 moves (commands). I’m not about to list those 34 right now, but I can tell you that that includes Ctrl+S (Save File), Alt+F (Close File), Ctrl+P (Print Setup), Ctrl+B (Bold), Ctrl+E (Center), Ctrl+2 (Doublespace), Ctrl+J (Justified), Shift+F3 (Change Case).

Help! Should also take care of troubleshooting all kinds of things like problematic files, printers, fonts, paragraphs, columns tables – without the technical language. Why is Windows Help such a large file of Unhelp? Because it’s all specialized knowledge that you wouldn’t understand what it’s saying because computerese gets in the way. The Help technical writers are not trying to explain to a user who knows next to nothing – they are explaining to other technical writers.

Help! will get rid of Office Assistant, that pesky, ubiquitous animated insultant Clip-on-Paper that makes you look the ignorant user that you are at this point in time. Clip is an embarrassment that is always waiting to happen.

I will not write a book or manual called Help! For Dummies/Idiots. A publication like that is not anywhere intuitive, not anywhere beginning from the assumption that you are human and you don’t want to listen and try to understand computer language by going to a Dictionary of Computer Terms. And if it were true that it is for idiots, why would you want to read a book that starts by insulting you?

Those experts have forgotten how it is to be intimidated by what appears to be an intelligent machine, more intelligent than most people.

date

iWord File

Help!↔File↔Revise↔Access↔Nicen↔KnowMore↔Surf

date

iWord Revise

Help!↔File↔Revise↔Access↔Nicen↔KnowMore↔Surf

date

iWord Access

Help!↔File↔Revise↔Access↔Nicen↔KnowMore↔Surf

date

iWord Nicen

Help!↔File↔Revise↔Access↔Nicen↔KnowMore↔Surf

date

iWord KnowMore

Help!↔File↔Revise↔Access↔Nicen↔KnowMore↔Surf

date

iWord Surf

Help!↔File↔Revise↔Access↔Nicen↔KnowMore↔Surf

Swork: Attitude & Style In Worping
Being a writer, editor and publisher for others public and private, from my experience of 20 years using many a word processor (worp), I know that people do not enjoy word processing (worping) in preparing letters, reports, brochures, newsletters, manuals, books. A self-appointed advocate, with ‘The Word Professor’ blogsite, I am finally campaigning in earnest for intelligent and inspired writing, editing and publishing using software – preferably Microsoft Word. I’m 66; what took me so long? Attitude.

Why Word? I’ll tell you why. Unlike most people, I enjoy worping. Notice that I have so far invented two words: worp and worping. Swork is another; I invented that word today as a shortcut or an acronym for this thought to encourage you, if you needed encouragement: Word processing is work, but it’s special. Swork is not only a thought; it is also an attitude between artist and his art, between the user and the software. Image from Carf who captions it ‘The Stronger Sex’ (flickr.com/) – I don’t necessarily agree, but that’s attitude! The girl has just the right expression: you look at her and you get the message.

Worping. Word processing started for me in 28 December of 1985, when I got acquainted with WordStar, and it was great. From typewriter to keyboard, that is a stunning paradigm shift which some writers have never gotten to make, like my favorite writer Ray Bradbury – he is still typing his stories with his typewriter. Worping was heaven-sent. Then along came Microsoft Word, and that was God-sent. Next came WordPerfect and that was devil-sent – it created the most beautiful documents but it was also the most difficult to learn among the word processors (worps) in the world.

I ran away from WordPerfect, sorry to say. Actually, Microsoft Word was almost as difficult as WordPerfect, but it was most full of shortcuts (macros) and mnemonic or memorable commands (like Ctrl+J for justified text, Ctrl+P for Print, Ctrl+B for bold etc), as well as programmable commands (you can make your own shortcuts). It still is, even more so. And Word has style, and now I can reprogram Word myself (see blogpost below for more on this subject). In Word, style is expressed through the stylesheet, now referred to as template. The template in Word is by far the best in the world, bar none.

I was already 45 years old, in 1985, when I started to learn worping all by myself, with a little help for a day from a reluctant someone. I didn’t mind her bad attitude of not wanting to share knowledge, because I wanted to learn, and she had to teach me because I asked our boss to ask her, tell her, and she couldn’t refuse: I had just published a book for the office using the IBM Selectric III typewriter. Anyway, I typed the whole WordStar manual (20 pages?) and memorized all the commands and manipulated them to make macros. I aimed at mastering WordStar; then I ran away several months later and aimed at mastering WordPerfect; then I ran away again after a month and aimed at mastering Word, and never left. I wanted to be the best I could be as a writer, editor and publisher, so I pushed myself learning the intricacies of writing, editing, publishing using the personal computer. WordPerfect would not allow me. Today, I am probably the most persistent writer, editor, publisher you can find who is hands-on on hardware and software. I worp, not run from anything that can be typed on the keyboard.

With intense study, about 5 years later, in 1990, I saw that I already knew about Microsoft Word more than anybody else; I already was in a position to share. But I did not share. My attitude was: You want to be good at worping, you study yourself. I didn’t learn to be good overnight.

A few years ago, I ran away from that selfish attitude. I have since changed my mind. And I have finally found my medium. Today, I want to share what I know with the many people in private homes, in schools and offices who would like to improve themselves as writers, editors, publishers using worping software. Share as in free. Just remember that I can’t give you the attitude of wanting to learn – you have to do it yourself!

In the first few years working with Word, I too found this software difficult to work with because the language is highly technical, most of the commands are not suggestive of what they do, and their groupings are either problematic or hard to understand or both. No matter the claim to the contrary, Microsoft Word is not intuitive. Not only that, except for Alpha (gone forever), the menu of the Word that I came to know in 1986 has hardly changed over the years; it’s been 20 years now. If there is any significant change, it’s the added layers of difficulty. But I can be a very stubborn student – intent on studying the impossible. My reward was that after laboring over those quaint commands, I have mastered Word like I have mastered typing: my fingers know which keys to strike for hundreds of commands automatically. (I’ll give you an idea how good I am at typing: Several years ago, someone saw me at the computer keyboard, and she asked: ‘Are you typing or are you playing?’ And I answered: ‘Both.’ And it’s true – Swork! Word processing is work but it’s special to me. I want nothing but to be the best.)

I’m not expecting you to master Word, but I’m expecting you to swork it. To be good at it, to be the best even, I’m expecting from you first and only one thing: Attitude.

You might ask if I’m trying to help Mr Bill Gates sell Microsoft Word. In a direct sense I am, but nobody is paying me. I don’t own a single Microsoft stock – I don’t even own a single Microsoft sock. But I’m the best example of you being able to learn good worping, because I was already 45 when I started, and I’m 99.7% self-taught – .3% of the time I ask. It’s all attitude, not age.

iWord: Microsoft’s Potential, My Passion

Mr Bill Gates, where do you want Microsoft to go today? Your potential, our passion.

17 years, I’ve had the bright idea that long that I long to catch the ears of Mr Bill Gates. And it is simply this: Microsoft re-build Microsoft Word from the ground up (including Word 2003) and turn its command-driven menu into a truly user-friendly one, the user meaning someone like me, self-taught, can’t be bothered to attend formal classes. And I have been wanting to show Mr Bill Gates how it can be done.

I am a freelance writer, editor, publisher, blogger, non-programmer. Not to worry; anyhow, I need only a little programming to show & sell my word-idea (concept) of iWord, a reincarnation of Word. My available, accessible tool in fact professional word processors (humans) should know already – it’s called Customize.

This is the current Word menu that’s 17 years behind the Age of the Internet:

File Edit View Insert Format Tools Table Window Help

Why would little me dare Big Bill Gates to remake Word’s ancient, sacred menu? Because I find the main menu components’ fuzzy logic Greek to me. And since OpenOffice’s Writer takes after Word, I dare them likewise.

Why? File = Edit = View = Insert = Format = Tools = Table = Window = Help. Displaying thus, the menu declares that they are equal in importance in a word processor (program). No, they are not. And the menu implies that they comprise working groups of features of a good word processing software. No, they do not.

Why: Under Edit, you find Cut, Copy, Paste, Find, Find & Replace, Repeat Typing – these are not in any stretch of the imagination anywhere near the idea of Edit. The Microsoft Boys have redefined the concept of Edit and thereby misled many a word processor (people) for so long. To edit is to correct and/or revise. Under Edit would be Spell Check, Grammar Check, Autocorrect, Word Count, Compare Side By Side.

Why: The Template is a Tool, a powerful one at that, but it’s assigned to Format (Styles & Formatting). Table is a Format, but it is listed separately. Window is a View but it’s all by its lonesome.

Now then, here is the menu I propose for Mr Bill Gates’ iWord:

Help File Revise Access Nicen KnowMore Surf

Help is self-explanatory. Even so, I would put in there a sub-menu called Reminders, containing My Short List of Word commands, a total of 33 in all, for professional work by non-professionals. Currently, Word has a total of 1070 commands (generated by this command series: Tools Macro Macros ListCommands Run). Neither one can possibly memorize all those by heart nor is it necessary.

File sub-menus would include Save, Save All, Save As, Page Setup, Columns, Margins, Views.

Revise sub-menus would include Find, Find & Replace, Insert, Format, Track Changes, Compare Documents, Outline-Organize.

Access sub-menus would include Accessories. ColorPrinter, LaserPrinter, Copyer, Fax, Scanner, Webcam, Headphone, Media Player, Speakers, Internet connections.

Nicen sub-menus would include the Template/Stylesheet. I invented the word-idea Nicen to mean make nice or nicer. In that case, Nicen becomes the most powerful set of commands in word processing.

KnowMore sub-menus would include other necessary features: Calculate, Customize, WordDraw, Pictures, Publishing.

Surf sub-menus would include Definition, Thesaurus, Translation, Research, Internet surfing.

iWord I call it; all in all, an intelligent Word. It’s a new, different, desirable Microsoft Word, Mr Bill Gates. Your potential. My passion.