> Besides that it was slow and never felt like a native Windows app I'm not sure what version you used, but by 6.1 it felt lighter and quicker than Word IMHO,

> Besides that it was slow and never felt like a native Windows app I'm not sure what version you used, but by 6.1 it felt lighter and quicker than Word IMHO, and I'm pretty sure it had a standard Windows interface -- at least neither I nor the many users I supported had problems with the UI. > it tried to replace the Windows printing subsystem with its own driver system, which was very confusing and caused problems for other Windows programs. Maybe you are thinking of the initial Windows version. I supported many users and systems who used WP for Windows, and I knew others who did the same, and these were not common user problems that I recall. WP did use its own print drivers or provide those as an option, I think to provide more accurate WYSIWYG. Occasionally WP itself would have problems because it somehow integrated the print driver in WYSIWYG (a good idea if you think about it), but I don't recall other applications having problems.