--- In wordperfectmac@yahoogroups.com, Keith Addison <gha@...> wrote:

> Does that include OS 9.2.2?

No. SheepShaver will not work with OS versions later than 9.0.4.

John R.

On Thu, Jan 15, 2009 at 02:20:21AM +0900, Keith Addison wrote:
>>SheepShaver Prefs has an option to Boot from CD. Activate that, quit
>>SS, insert your OS 9 CD and start SS again.
>
>Does that include OS 9.2.2?

If you did not see my reply, which probably arrived after you asked this,
NO. SS only supports up to 9.0.4.

Geoff.

--
Geoffrey S. Mendelson, Jerusalem, Israel gsm@...  N3OWJ/4X1GM

According to the MetaMacro instructions, it's still required. That
grinding noise you hear is me becoming conversant in this arcanity.

JS


On Wed, Jan 14, 2009 at 5:40 PM, Rick Albright <logres@...> wrote:
> It's been awhile, but you used to have to download and install a
> little program called something like "Akua sweets." I don't know if
> this is still required, but some of John's macros needed it.
>
> Rick Albright
>
>

>--- In wordperfectmac@yahoogroups.com, Keith Addison <gha@...> wrote:
>
>>  Does that include OS 9.2.2?
>
>No. SheepShaver will not work with OS versions later than 9.0.4.
>
>John R.

Thankyou John.

I have a 9.1 disk, but not 9.0.4.

All best

Keith

>On Thu, Jan 15, 2009 at 02:20:21AM +0900, Keith Addison wrote:
>>>SheepShaver Prefs has an option to Boot from CD. Activate that, quit
>>>SS, insert your OS 9 CD and start SS again.
>>
>>Does that include OS 9.2.2?
>
>If you did not see my reply, which probably arrived after you asked this,
>NO. SS only supports up to 9.0.4.

Thankyou Geoff. That's right, I hadn't seen your reply yet.

>I've not been able to get an upgrade to work properly.You can't install
>a reasonable (IMHO) OS9 system on the disk image in the sheepshaver WP
>package, it won't fit. When I create a larger image, no matter what I
>do, when I am done, the boot time disk check tells me the disk needs to
>be repaired with OSX disk utility, but the Leopard disk utility won't
>check it.

:-(

Are upgrades to OS 8 or 8.5/6 okay, or are you using 7.5.I? Maybe it
would work with Tiger?

Running Sheepshaver from an OS 9 CD would slow it down a lot (and tie
up the drive).

Has anyone managed to upgrade to 9.0.4?

All best

Keith


>Geoff.
>
>--
>Geoffrey S. Mendelson, Jerusalem, Israel gsm@...  N3OWJ/4X1GM

On Fri, Jan 16, 2009 at 12:14:47AM +0900, Keith Addison wrote:
>Are upgrades to OS 8 or 8.5/6 okay, or are you using 7.5.I? Maybe it
>would work with Tiger?

You can upgrade to MacOS 8 pretty easily, again, you need a RETAIL CD.
If you do, apply the 8.1 upgrade, which you can download from Apple.

The same with 8.5. I've never seen an 8.6 true install CD, the only ones
I have seen boot an 8.6 System folder that will only run from a CD. When you
install 8.6 from them, they do a standard 8.5 install and then run the 8.6
upgrade. The result is the same, the process strange. :-)


>Running Sheepshaver from an OS 9 CD would slow it down a lot (and tie
>up the drive).
>
>Has anyone managed to upgrade to 9.0.4?

I've done it by creating a disk image, copying all of the files over from
the WordPerfect 7.5 image and then installing OS9. The problem I have
is that diskcheck runs and tells me that the disk needs to be repaired with
the OSX disk utility, but then the Leopard (10.5.6) one won't check the
disk, it claims it can't find a file system.

In other cases, I've run SS under Windows with a 9.0.4 system installed
on an empty image from the CD. Before I had the 9.0.4 CD, I used a 9.0.1
and installed the updates from Apple.

As for what to upgrade to, 8.0/8.1 is mixed code, some of it is 680x0 code
running on a built in 68020 emulator. 8.5 is pure PPC code, so it will run
faster, but it is awfully buggy, so it needs the 8.6 update.

OS9 adds some features, and there are a few changes with 9.1.5. Most of them
had to do with hardware support, which is why they won't run under SS.
OS 9.2.x had to do with running in classic mode and also had some hardware
upgrades. I personally don't know of any APPLICATION software that requires
OS9 beyond 9.0.4, but that does not mean there isn't any.

Geoff.

--
Geoffrey S. Mendelson, Jerusalem, Israel gsm@...  N3OWJ/4X1GM

Hello Geoff

Thanks very much, that's made quite a few things clear. Very helpful!

All best

Keith


>On Fri, Jan 16, 2009 at 12:14:47AM +0900, Keith Addison wrote:
>>Are upgrades to OS 8 or 8.5/6 okay, or are you using 7.5.I? Maybe it
>>would work with Tiger?
>
>You can upgrade to MacOS 8 pretty easily, again, you need a RETAIL CD.
>If you do, apply the 8.1 upgrade, which you can download from Apple.
>
>The same with 8.5. I've never seen an 8.6 true install CD, the only ones
>I have seen boot an 8.6 System folder that will only run from a CD. When you
>install 8.6 from them, they do a standard 8.5 install and then run the 8.6
>upgrade. The result is the same, the process strange. :-)
>
>>Running Sheepshaver from an OS 9 CD would slow it down a lot (and tie
>>up the drive).
>>
>>Has anyone managed to upgrade to 9.0.4?
>
>I've done it by creating a disk image, copying all of the files over from
>the WordPerfect 7.5 image and then installing OS9. The problem I have
>is that diskcheck runs and tells me that the disk needs to be repaired with
>the OSX disk utility, but then the Leopard (10.5.6) one won't check the
>disk, it claims it can't find a file system.
>
>In other cases, I've run SS under Windows with a 9.0.4 system installed
>on an empty image from the CD. Before I had the 9.0.4 CD, I used a 9.0.1
>and installed the updates from Apple.
>
>As for what to upgrade to, 8.0/8.1 is mixed code, some of it is 680x0 code
>running on a built in 68020 emulator. 8.5 is pure PPC code, so it will run
>faster, but it is awfully buggy, so it needs the 8.6 update.
>
>OS9 adds some features, and there are a few changes with 9.1.5. Most of them
>had to do with hardware support, which is why they won't run under SS.
>OS 9.2.x had to do with running in classic mode and also had some hardware
>upgrades. I personally don't know of any APPLICATION software that requires
>OS9 beyond 9.0.4, but that does not mean there isn't any.
>
>Geoff.
>
>--
>Geoffrey S. Mendelson, Jerusalem, Israel gsm@...  N3OWJ/4X1GM
>
>------------------------------------

--- In wordperfectmac@yahoogroups.com, Keith Addison <gha@...> wrote:
>
[snip]
>
> Has anyone managed to upgrade to 9.0.4?
>
> All best
>
> Keith
>
I have a 1.25GB disk image with 9.0.4 installed, running under Sheepshaver on a
MacBook
Pro 17" C2D 2.33. I can't fully recall how I set this up, but I think I:
1. installed John's then current version of SS WP, got it running and then quit
out of SS;
2. used OSX Disk Utility to create a new 1.25GB blank disk image;
3. changed the disk used by SS to the new blank image, started up SS, inserted
the 9.0.4
retail install disk in the MBP's DVD drive, ran the 9.0.4 install program and
then shutdown
SS again;
4. added John's SS WP disk image as a second disk for use by SS, started it up,
installed WP
3.5.4 from my original install disks (and a few other old 680x0/PPC programs I
use
occasionally), upgraded to WP 3.5e and then copied various of John's files over
to my new
disk.

Voila -- it worked, and continues to do so today, a few SS upgrades later. (MS
apps are
very flaky, however, but weren't they always?)

I'm sure others on this site can tell you of easier ways to upgrade if you
really want to do
so. You could try to do it the way I've mentioned above, but I may have
misremembered
some of this -- its a couple of years since I set it up.

Mark McKeon
Brisbane, Australia

In John's post from the topic "New version of SheepShaver install in
progress - what needs to be added/fixed" (January 12, 2009) he says:

"When I first did this I compared SS and Basilisk, comparing not load
times but speed times in intensive operation such as spell-checking.
I found SS (using PowerPC WP) slightly faster than Basilisk with 68K
WP, but nothing decisive. I remembered that the 68K version seemed
to have a couple of bugs the PPC version didn't, including something
with hyphenation. I also found it harder to set Basilisk to a large
screen size, but I didn't take a close look there.

What I think's best would be to keep an SS install available along with
your fine WPApplianceFiles setup with Basilisk, as some users may have
other reasons to choose one or the other, e.g. running another
legacy app as well that needs either PPC or 68K.
John R."

My questions are:
1. Does the Intel version of SS run on Unix with the Unix SS build or
as the PPC or 68K verion?
2. Will Basilisk also run on the Intel mac?
3. Are there applications that run better with Basilisk or better with
SS on Intel.
4. Does the shared folder for either Basilisk or SS work better with
the Intel Mac?

I still haven't loaded either SS or Basilisk on my new Intel
MacBookPro.  I was considering waiting for John's New Version of SS
install to make my life ever so much easier.  That will be so?

On Sat, Jan 17, 2009 at 05:18:55PM -0000, somniferous1 wrote:
>In John's post from the topic "New version of SheepShaver install in
>progress - what needs to be added/fixed" (January 12, 2009) he says:
>
>"When I first did this I compared SS and Basilisk, comparing not load
>times but speed times in intensive operation such as spell-checking.
>I found SS (using PowerPC WP) slightly faster than Basilisk with 68K
>WP, but nothing decisive. I remembered that the 68K version seemed
>to have a couple of bugs the PPC version didn't, including something
>with hyphenation. I also found it harder to set Basilisk to a large
>screen size, but I didn't take a close look there.
>
>What I think's best would be to keep an SS install available along with
>your fine WPApplianceFiles setup with Basilisk, as some users may have
>other reasons to choose one or the other, e.g. running another
>legacy app as well that needs either PPC or 68K.
>John R."
>

>1. Does the Intel version of SS run on Unix with the Unix SS build or
>as the PPC or 68K verion?

It depends. SS itself is written in C. You can find (or compile it
yourself) a version compiled for PPC, which will run on PPC Macs, and
slower on Intel ones using Rosetta, and you can find an Intel version
which will only run on Intel computers (but faster than the PPC one).

I believe the latest version of the SS/WP combination includes an Intel
only version of SS.


>2. Will Basilisk also run on the Intel mac?

Yes. BII is also written in C, and can be compiled for either. See above.

>3. Are there applications that run better with Basilisk or better with
>SS on Intel.

The answer to that question is yes. The real question is are there applications
which run better on 680x0 or the PPC? It also depends upon the version of
System/MacOS that you are running.

Apple was unable to produce a working OS for the PPC in time, so they
included a 68020 emulator in the system. Most of System 7.5 and 7.6 were
emulated and parts of 8.1/8.1, 8.5 was the first totally PPC release. The
emulator hung around until MacOS 8.6 for application programs.

So if you are not careful, you can end up having your Mac emulating a
PPC processor and MacOS running on it emulating a 68020. If that's
the case, you should just use BII and emulate the 68020 directly.

Apple was able to get away with it because a 66mHz first generation PPC
chip emulated a 68020 faster than a real 68040 ran the same code. The 68060
may have been faster, but too few (and AFAIK no Macs) were produced
to find out.

>4. Does the shared folder for either Basilisk or SS work better with
>the Intel Mac?

AFAIK they are the same.

>I still haven't loaded either SS or Basilisk on my new Intel
>MacBookPro.  I was considering waiting for John's New Version of SS
>install to make my life ever so much easier.  That will be so?

I can't speak for John, or anyone else, but to me the current one was
easy to install manually. If you are new to OSX and new to unpacking zip
files and moving things to the correct folders, it will make your life
a lot easier. If you are an "old hand" at them, it won't be much of
a difference.

Geoff.
--
Geoffrey S. Mendelson, Jerusalem, Israel gsm@...  N3OWJ/4X1GM

Hello Mark

Thanks, good news. Good enough for me, I'll go for it (though 8.6
isn't too bad).

All best

Keith

>--- In wordperfectmac@yahoogroups.com, Keith Addison <gha@...> wrote:
>>
>[snip]
>>
>>  Has anyone managed to upgrade to 9.0.4?
>>
>>  All best
>>
>>  Keith
>>
>I have a 1.25GB disk image with 9.0.4 installed, running under
>Sheepshaver on a MacBook
>Pro 17" C2D 2.33. I can't fully recall how I set this up, but I think I:
>1. installed John's then current version of SS WP, got it running
>and then quit out of SS;
>2. used OSX Disk Utility to create a new 1.25GB blank disk image;
>3. changed the disk used by SS to the new blank image, started up
>SS, inserted the 9.0.4
>retail install disk in the MBP's DVD drive, ran the 9.0.4 install
>program and then shutdown
>SS again;
>4. added John's SS WP disk image as a second disk for use by SS,
>started it up, installed WP
>3.5.4 from my original install disks (and a few other old 680x0/PPC
>programs I use
>occasionally), upgraded to WP 3.5e and then copied various of John's
>files over to my new
>disk.
>
>Voila -- it worked, and continues to do so today, a few SS upgrades
>later. (MS apps are
>very flaky, however, but weren't they always?)
>
>I'm sure others on this site can tell you of easier ways to upgrade
>if you really want to do
>so. You could try to do it the way I've mentioned above, but I may
>have misremembered
>some of this -- its a couple of years since I set it up.
>
>Mark McKeon
>Brisbane, Australia

Thanks Geoff.  Great answers.

I am afraid I don't know the difference between PPC and 68K versions.
  How will I know and what will I use once I know?

I am going to be running OS 9.0.4.  I will be using my Intel Mac.
(otherwise known as "glarey sceen").  I ran all my OS9 applications on
my G4 until now...still do since I am converting my business to the
Intel at this time.  I am trying to decide to whether to wait for John
or just forge ahead courageously with the previous build.  Just want
to be sure I am making good choices for loading software and emulators.

How involved is the Basilisk II install?  How much room do these take
(seeing how I read that some folks have both running.)

In addition, when running a certain version of Sheepshaver do you have
to do a complete removal and reinstall when a newer build comes out?
I haven't had any luck installing more than one version of sheepshaver
at a time.


--- In wordperfectmac@yahoogroups.com, "Geoffrey S. Mendelson"
<gsm@...> wrote:
>
> On Sat, Jan 17, 2009 at 05:18:55PM -0000, somniferous1 wrote:
> >In John's post from the topic "New version of SheepShaver install in
> >progress - what needs to be added/fixed" (January 12, 2009) he says:
> >
> >"When I first did this I compared SS and Basilisk, comparing not load
> >times but speed times in intensive operation such as spell-checking.
> >I found SS (using PowerPC WP) slightly faster than Basilisk with 68K
> >WP, but nothing decisive. I remembered that the 68K version seemed
> >to have a couple of bugs the PPC version didn't, including something
> >with hyphenation. I also found it harder to set Basilisk to a large
> >screen size, but I didn't take a close look there.
> >
> >What I think's best would be to keep an SS install available along with
> >your fine WPApplianceFiles setup with Basilisk, as some users may have
> >other reasons to choose one or the other, e.g. running another
> >legacy app as well that needs either PPC or 68K.
> >John R."
> >
>
> >1. Does the Intel version of SS run on Unix with the Unix SS build or
> >as the PPC or 68K verion?
>
> It depends. SS itself is written in C. You can find (or compile it
> yourself) a version compiled for PPC, which will run on PPC Macs, and
> slower on Intel ones using Rosetta, and you can find an Intel version
> which will only run on Intel computers (but faster than the PPC one).
>
> I believe the latest version of the SS/WP combination includes an Intel
> only version of SS.
>
>
> >2. Will Basilisk also run on the Intel mac?
>
> Yes. BII is also written in C, and can be compiled for either. See
above.
>
> >3. Are there applications that run better with Basilisk or better with
> >SS on Intel.
>
> The answer to that question is yes. The real question is are there
applications
> which run better on 680x0 or the PPC? It also depends upon the
version of
> System/MacOS that you are running.
>
> Apple was unable to produce a working OS for the PPC in time, so they
> included a 68020 emulator in the system. Most of System 7.5 and 7.6 were
> emulated and parts of 8.1/8.1, 8.5 was the first totally PPC
release. The
> emulator hung around until MacOS 8.6 for application programs.
>
> So if you are not careful, you can end up having your Mac emulating a
> PPC processor and MacOS running on it emulating a 68020. If that's
> the case, you should just use BII and emulate the 68020 directly.
>
> Apple was able to get away with it because a 66mHz first generation PPC
> chip emulated a 68020 faster than a real 68040 ran the same code.
The 68060
> may have been faster, but too few (and AFAIK no Macs) were produced
> to find out.
>
> >4. Does the shared folder for either Basilisk or SS work better with
> >the Intel Mac?
>
> AFAIK they are the same.
>
> >I still haven't loaded either SS or Basilisk on my new Intel
> >MacBookPro.  I was considering waiting for John's New Version of SS
> >install to make my life ever so much easier.  That will be so?
>
> I can't speak for John, or anyone else, but to me the current one was
> easy to install manually. If you are new to OSX and new to unpacking zip
> files and moving things to the correct folders, it will make your life
> a lot easier. If you are an "old hand" at them, it won't be much of
> a difference.
>
> Geoff.
> --
> Geoffrey S. Mendelson, Jerusalem, Israel gsm@...  N3OWJ/4X1GM
>

I've posted a page of links and instructions
for my BasiliskII-based variation on John's
high-powered and high-capability SheepShaver-
based system available on this site. The
page is here, and it may be worth looking at
for additional information on ways to use
WPMac files in other programs:

http://wpdos.org/mac-intel.html

It explains the whole process of
installing and running the system. The
installation requires only a few mouse
clicks.

Again, this system is designed for viewing
and converting existing WPMac files. It
is not intended for anyone who wants to
use WPMac to get work done. For actually
using WPMac as your main word-processor,
then John's SheepShaver-based system is
by far the way to go.

On Wed, Jan 21, 2009 at 02:18:37PM -0000, somniferous1 wrote:
>Thanks Geoff.  Great answers.

You're welcome.
>I am afraid I don't know the difference between PPC and 68K versions.
> How will I know and what will I use once I know?

That's been a really tough one for me to answer. The short answer is that
if possible, always use a "fat" (both) or PPC version of an application.
It will run faster.

The long answer is I can't tell you how to check easily. Being a programer,
I could tell you to open the file with RESEDIT and look for CODE (680x0)
resources and their PPC equivalent (which I've forgotten).

But if you are not a programmer, it may be not worth the effort to learn.

Is there a better way? Maybe someone else can answer that.

The interesting part is I tried to run a 680x0 binary (WP 1 from Ed Mendelson's
disk) and it opened under SheepShaver running MacOS 9.0.4. I did not
try to test it beyond that.

If it runs, it makes no difference what it is to the average user.

This was running SS under MacOS 10.5.6 Intel.

>I am going to be running OS 9.0.4.  I will be using my Intel Mac.
>(otherwise known as "glarey sceen").  I ran all my OS9 applications on
>my G4 until now...still do since I am converting my business to the
>Intel at this time.  I am trying to decide to whether to wait for John
>or just forge ahead courageously with the previous build.  Just want
>to be sure I am making good choices for loading software and emulators.

It does not seem to me that you can at this time make a BAD choice. You make
make a less than optimal one, but it will still work and be ok. YMMV.

As long as the programs run without corrupting data, you should be fine. I have
not heard of any data corruption, and I've been using BII for a long time.

>How involved is the Basilisk II install?  How much room do these take
>(seeing how I read that some folks have both running.)

Seemed to be pretty simple to me.

>In addition, when running a certain version of Sheepshaver do you have
>to do a complete removal and reinstall when a newer build comes out?
>I haven't had any luck installing more than one version of sheepshaver
>at a time.

AFAIK No. SS is a complete program, if you have 5 versions on your computer,
it runs the one you choose when you start it up. If you have only one, it
runs it when you click on it.

As for disk space, the amount used by BI or SS is trivial. What takes up space
is the emualted disk images. If you want to emulate a 40m BII disk, then
it takes up 40m. If you want to emulate a 1g SS drive to run 9.0.4, then
it takes up a gigabyte. If you have a Beige G3 running OS 9 with 100g
of disk space, it's going to take up 100g of disk space on your new Mac.

I expect that most people don't have that much, a friend with a fairly
well expanded Beige G3 had 2 4G drives on it (one internal IDE and one
internal 4g wide SCSI bought as an option).

Geoff.

--
Geoffrey S. Mendelson, Jerusalem, Israel gsm@...  N3OWJ/4X1GM

Happy birthday, and thanks to Jobs/Wozniak, Jef Raskin, Bill Atkinson,
Andy Hertzfeld and several others, and to Xerox PARC. GUI was a
really good idea.

John R.

--- In wordperfectmac@yahoogroups.com, "Edward Mendelson" <em315@...>
wrote:
>
> I've posted a page of links and instructions
> for my BasiliskII-based variation on John's
> high-powered and high-capability SheepShaver-
> based system available on this site. The
> page is here, and it may be worth looking at
> for additional information on ways to use
> WPMac files in other programs:
>
> http://wpdos.org/mac-intel.html
>...... *snip*........

Very nice and easy app.

Two things I was curious about.

1. When I take a table (in another application and not in WP) and copy
the list to the clipboard the clipboard pastes it to the OS10 as a
picture.  I would much prefer the list as data.  (that is what used to
happen in the system 7.5)  Does WP have a table function I can use?

2. The appliance says it has a limit as 254 MB.  Although I read that
I can create another image I was unaware (till now) that I have nearly
exceeded that limit (264,734,209 bytes).  Nothing happened so far.
What might happen?

The appliance is truly easy to install and use.   I like it a lot.

Keep your ISP honest & neutral. Courtesy of Google:

http://www.measurementlab.net/

John R.

--- In wordperfectmac@yahoogroups.com, somniferous1 <no_reply@...> wrote:

>
> 1. When I take a table (in another application and not in WP) and copy
> the list to the clipboard the clipboard pastes it to the OS10 as a
> picture.  I would much prefer the list as data.  (that is what used to
> happen in the system 7.5)  Does WP have a table function I can use?

Not sure what you're asking. If you're asking if WP has a table function,
look at the WP top line menu, where you will see a "Table" menu. If
you're asking about the clipboard, go to the forums at
www.emaculation.com where they know all about such things.


> 2. The appliance says it has a limit as 254 MB.  Although I read that
> I can create another image I was unaware (till now) that I have nearly
> exceeded that limit (264,734,209 bytes).  Nothing happened so far.
> What might happen?

If you run out of disk space, you can create another disk. Use the
Emulator Disk Image Chooser application that came with the
Basilisk II installer. It is entirely self-explanatory. You will not need
any further advice from us on how to use it.

So Im probably going to ask a dumb question...

I have tried all the programs on here to convert Micro Perfect files
to Word on a MAC and they dont work. Help!

Thanks
Maureen

--- In wordperfectmac@yahoogroups.com, "meaux82" <meaux82@...> wrote:

> I have tried all the programs on here to convert Micro Perfect files
> to Word on a MAC and they dont work. Help!

Um . . . instead of Micro Perfect I guess you mean WordPerfect.

If so, see the Conversions folder in the Files section here. You can convert
WordPerfect Mac or PC files to Word Mac version 6, which all later
versions of Word can read. These conversions all come with instructions.

John R.

--- In wordperfectmac@yahoogroups.com, "meaux82" <meaux82@...> wrote:
>
> So Im probably going to ask a dumb question...
>
> I have tried all the programs on here to convert Micro Perfect files
> to Word on a MAC and they dont work. Help!

Not a dumb question, but one that doesn't provide an absolutely essential piece
of
information:

Are you trying to convert files created by "WordPerfect for the Mac" or files
created by
"WordPerfect for Windows" or by "WordPerfect for DOS"?  If the files were
originally created
on a Windows (or DOS) computer, then the answer will be very different from the
answer if
the files were created on a Mac.

John, does the Files section have any converters for WPWin files?

--- In wordperfectmac@yahoogroups.com, "Edward Mendelson" <em315@...> wrote:

> John, does the Files section have any converters for WPWin files?

Yes it does, plus excellent conversion guides by Jonathan Busch
and Smokey Ardisson.

John R.

--- In wordperfectmac@yahoogroups.com, "John Rethorst" <jrethorst@...>
wrote:
>
> --- In wordperfectmac@yahoogroups.com, "Edward Mendelson" <em315@>
wrote:
>
> > John, does the Files section have any converters for WPWin files?
>
> Yes it does, plus excellent conversion guides by Jonathan Busch
> and Smokey Ardisson.

Ah, I see, yes. But those methods all assume that the
goal is to edit the WPWin/DOS files in WPMac. However,
I think it's possible that the original question may
have meant something more like this: "I have files
that I created in WordPerfect for Windows (or DOS)
and I want to use them on a Mac. What is the simplest
way to do that?"

The best answer to that question is probably NOT to
use WPMac, but to convert the files for use with
Microsoft Word for the Mac or some other modern
software written for OS X.  I don't think it's
practical for most people to set up a SheepShaver
or Basilisk II system simply to move files from
WPWin/WPDOS to Word-compatible format. So I've tried
to answer the question here:

http://www.columbia.edu/~em36/wpdos/wptoword.html#wordformac

Message 5614 asked about opening Word files in
WPMac 3.5e running (apparently in Classic) under
9.2.2. When I came back to reply to it, the message
seemed to have disappeared. Will it be back?

On Tue Feb 3, 2009 6:17 am ((PST)), "Edward Mendelson" <em315@...> wrote:

>I think it's possible that the original question may
>have meant something more like this: "I have files
>that I created in WordPerfect for Windows (or DOS)
>and I want to use them on a Mac. What is the simplest
>way to do that?"
>
[...]
>WPWin/WPDOS to Word-compatible format. So I've tried
>to answer the question here:
>
>http://www.columbia.edu/~em36/wpdos/wptoword.html#wordformac

Note that OpenOffice.org is not officially available (nor, to my
understanding, supported) on PPC Macs;  there are community builds
that you can find if you know where to look, but the download system
won't provide you with a download if you visit
download.openoffice.org with a PPC Mac (I just checked).  Anyone with
a PPC Mac would either need to hunt around for the community builds,
or use NeoOffice instead, which officially supports both PPC and
Intel: http://www.neooffice.org/

(Disclaimer: I have been, for a long time, a member of the
community-staffed NeoOffice support team.)

Smokey

--- In wordperfectmac@yahoogroups.com, "Edward Mendelson" <em315@...> wrote:

> Message 5614 asked about opening Word files in
> WPMac 3.5e running (apparently in Classic) under
> 9.2.2. When I came back to reply to it, the message
> seemed to have disappeared. Will it be back?

I did not delete it. I don't know if a person who posts a message can
delete it or not. My two signons are as moderator and owner, which
allow deletions of any messages so, without a user signon, I don't
know whether a specific user can delete messages he or she has
posted. In the Messages (not Home) screen, look at the messages
you've posted. Is there a delete checkbox to the left, that is not there
for other messages?

John R.

--- In wordperfectmac@yahoogroups.com, "John Rethorst" <jrethorst@...> wrote:

>
> I did not delete it. I don't know if a person who posts a message can
> delete it or not. My two signons are as moderator and owner, which
> allow deletions of any messages so, without a user signon, I don't
> know whether a specific user can delete messages he or she has
> posted. In the Messages (not Home) screen, look at the messages
> you've posted. Is there a delete checkbox to the left, that is not there
> for other messages?

Yep, you can delete your own messages - as I discovered after I
posted mine. Presumably, the original poster deleted his. But it
was a good question...!

On Feb 3, 2009, at 9:17 AM, Edward Mendelson wrote:
> The best answer to that question is probably NOT to
> use WPMac, but to convert the files for use with
> Microsoft Word for the Mac or some other modern
> software written for OS X. I don't think it's
> practical for most people to set up a SheepShaver
> or Basilisk II system simply to move files from
> WPWin/WPDOS to Word-compatible format. So I've tried
> to answer the question here:
>
You are assuming, of course, that the user is using an Intel Mac.
That may not be the case. While I realize that many members of this
list do so, some of us still have Power PC (or even older) machines.
It might be much simpler to stick with WordPerfect if Classic is
involved.

I am sorry to say this, but sometimes I think that the list has
become almost entirely concerned with Sheepshaver and Basilisk. I
almost never see a query any more that is not concerned with those
emulators. I may be in the minority by not having an Intel Mac, but
something tells me I am not. I do realize that as time goes on, our
numbers will shrink, but I also know that Macs are famed for their
longevity (and, after all, we are on a list devoted to a piece of
software that is quite venerable by software standards). In the
meantime, don't forget us.

Rick Albright

In a message dated 2009.02.04 21:02 -0500, John Rethorst wrote:

>> Message 5614 asked about opening Word files in
>> WPMac 3.5e running (apparently in Classic) under
>> 9.2.2. When I came back to reply to it, the message
>> seemed to have disappeared. Will it be back?
>
> ... I don't know if a person who posts a message can delete it or not. My two
signons are as moderator and owner, which allow deletions of any messages so,
without a user signon, I don't know whether a specific user can delete messages
he or she has posted.

Yes, users can delete their own posts (a feature of which I've availed
myself in not-too-rare moments of stupidity).

John K.

--- In wordperfectmac@yahoogroups.com, John Kaufmann <kaufmann@...> wrote:

> Yes, users can delete their own posts (a feature of which I've availed
> myself in not-too-rare moments of stupidity).
>
> John K.

John, your posts are of exceptional value. Please don't delete any more.

John R.