Talk:Word processor (electronic device)

Typography Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Typography, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles related to Typography on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.TypographyWikipedia:WikiProject TypographyTemplate:WikiProject TypographyTypography articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale.

Computing High‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Computing, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of computers, computing, and information technology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ComputingWikipedia:WikiProject ComputingTemplate:WikiProject ComputingComputing articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

This page has been cited as a source by a notable professional or academic publication:
William & Mary Law Review

Text and/or other creative content from this version of Document statistics was copied or moved into Word processor with this edit on 22:52, 19 January 2008. The former page's history now serves to provide attribution for that content in the latter page, and it must not be deleted as long as the latter page exists.

Text and/or other creative content from this version of Word processing was copied or moved into Word processor with this edit on 17:42, 6 January 2013. The former page's history now serves to provide attribution for that content in the latter page, and it must not be deleted as long as the latter page exists.

Archives

1

This page has archives. Sections older than 365 days may be automatically archived by when more than 5 sections are present.

Add a list of dedicated word processor hardware?

Should we add a list of dedicated word processor hardware such as the Friden Flexowriter, Canon Cat, Brother, and AlphaSmart ?

Sure, why not? Dpbsmith (talk) 14:48, 26 Jan 2005 (UTC)

http://c2.com/cgi/wiki?WordProcessor

AES was sold to Lanier Business Products in 1975. The product was rebranded as the "No Problem" word processor — Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.115.90.154 (talk) 16:26, 3 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Actual comparisons

Nice article. But it seems to me there isn't really that much actual comparing of word processors going on? The history and technology is interessting - but the article is about comparing the technologies, not the background of it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gardar Rurak (talk • contribs) 2005-08-13T22:54:47 (UTC)

Name of this page is not accurate

The IBM MT/ST and similar early word processing machines (Radio Shack had one) were electromechanical, not electronic.

Computer programs are not "devices". deisenbe (talk) 11:16, 22 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion:

Astrotype.jpg

You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 18:39, 2 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

File interoperability

Does anyone object to a brief section on word processing file format interoperability? I don’t think there is an ideal existing topic for See Also that explicitly covers this topic for word processors from a historical context. Data conversion is oriented to ETL. The goal is to have just enough historical context for a few appropriate wikilinks. Background: In 1984 IBM introduced Document Content Architecture (DCA) and in 1987 Microsoft released Rich Text Format (RTF). By 1985, DCA was used across the IBM mainframe and PC products, and other dedicated word processor and mainframe word processor vendors developed conversion apps to allow porting to and from IBM DCA Revisable-Form Text (DCA/RFT), or to emerging PC-based software. Some interoperability efforts initially envisioned that DCA/RFT would be a sufficient feature superset of other formats that it could be used as a canonical repository/intermediate format for bi-directional conversions. There was limited success in that approach but formats were specialized enough that too much was lost in a two-step conversion of complex documents so specific format-to-format conversion was preferred. MS Rich Text Format and eventually OPEN XML offered improvements on DCA for revisable interoperability. The early diversity of word processing file formats also gave rise to a cottage industry in word processor file conversion. Example vendor for Talk purposes.. Note: On the one hand, I’m old enough to have been involved with testing and using these early tools; on the other hand I’m also old enough to not be able to readily remember their project/product names in order to google up the references so I'll need some help with citations. Zatsugaku (talk) 05:47, 12 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]