Microsoft Word 5.5 And 6.0 In-depth DOS Review With Pics

Word 5.5 and 6.0

Microsoft, 1990, 1993

MS-DOS

$450

*My video review for Word 5.5/6.0

*Next article
*Previous article

*Alphabetical list of writings

*This review entirely written using Word 5.5/6.0 for DOS

A new apple tastes sweet, rots at home (A history)

            1983 would see the humble beginnings of a word processor that proved quite unpopular for the longest time. Microsoft Word started out on the Xenix and MS-DOS operating systems. It would be touted as a "what you see is what you get (WYSIWYG)" word processor, although it was not. From what I can gather, Microsoft was willing to make this claim simply because the ASCII environment they used allowed for bold and italic text changes to be seen on screen. This was not a true indication of what would be seen when printed, nor did it offer variable fonts and sizes. A tiny little white lie told to disparage the most popular text based word processor at the time, WordStar.

            The false hype was of little use, Microsoft Word would never become a competitor on Microsoft's own DOS platform. For something that started in 1983 and was never big in DOS, it may cause some to wonder how the program even survived long enough to eventually become the most popular word processor. Enter Apple and their new Macintosh computer. Bill Gates himself told his designers to focus on the Mac, and in 1985, following in the footsteps of MacWrite and other Mac word processors, Microsoft Word would finally become WYSIWYG. It would soon become the top selling word processor on the Mac, and despite the Apple market being much smaller than the PC's, would outsell the DOS version of Word as well.

^Word 5.5's interface

            Whether you love or hate Word, love or hate Microsoft itself, in the end you have Apple to thank (or curse) for this programs survival. Forever taking the backseat to WordStar and WordPerfect in DOS, I do wonder if Word wouldn't have just been discontinued before its acclaimed Windows release if not for the success of the Mac version. Did the Mac success teach Microsoft any kind of a lesson in terms of what they should try to accomplish with Word? Yes and no. Seems they got the hint when it came to graphical based operating systems such as the Mac. In a deal with Atari, Microsoft would port the Mac version of Word over to the ST (sorry Amiga fans), and in 1990 the first Windows release of Word would also go for a graphical look. WordPerfect, in contrast, decided to stick with what sold for DOS, keeping things text based. It would prove to be their downfall, as Word would soon become the bestselling word processor, a position it holds to this very day.

            But that's the graphical operating systems we're talking about. Microsoft did not seem to get the hint when it came to DOS. Despite the final DOS version of Word reaching a claimed "version parity" with its Windows and Mac counterparts, Word 6.0 for DOS had more in common with Word 5.0 (and below) for DOS than it had with the Windows versions. Of all companies WordPerfect would end up creating the only true WYSIWYG DOS based word processor, though it was a little late for a comeback. I do wonder what things might have been like if Microsoft decided to not play it safe in DOS. After all, it's not like playing it safe garnered them sales. Could an earlier WYSIWYG DOS word processor more quickly have seen the end of WordPerfect? Would it have instead caused WordPerfect to more quickly realize what they should have been aiming for? Would the Amiga version of WordPerfect had been something that took advantage of the Amiga? Would the first WordPerfect on Windows have been good enough that nobody would have cared about Microsoft's word processor? Or would Microsoft only have come to dominance ever sooner?

^Word 6.0's interface, fonts, print preview

Let's All Go To The C:\ Prompt (The Review)

            Microsoft Word 5.5 for DOS was released in 1990, and it has long been my preferred DOS word processor. I've gone as far as to set up a path in the autoexec file to it, so I can simply type "word" to start the program, as well as "word" along with a file name (example; word readme.txt) to view that file. In 1993 the final DOS version of Word would be released, Word 6.0. The funny thing is that Word 5.5 has more in common with Word 6.0 for DOS, than it does with 5.0, and I ended up using both 5.5 as well as 6.0 when writing this review.

            I called Word my preferred DOS word processor, but this is actually the first "real" document I've written on it. Calling something your favorite "DOS" anything is not necessarily saying much, after all. It has only been in the last couple of years that I've started using my Amiga for an occasional article written entirely or mostly on that machine, while most writings occur on modern programs and computers. I've really only ever had a need of this program to read DOS text files, as well as edit or create batch files.

            In terms of those two things, I've always loved Word 5.5 here. I remember never being a fan of the built in "edit" program for DOS, and I felt this version of Word improved the experience quite a bit, while still feeling familiar and giving you that "DOS feel". It loads up fast, let's me quickly edit and save files, and I don't mind the look; For DOS, anyway. Much like the Amiga version of WordPerfect, Word 5.5/6.0 is kind of a strange hybrid between a pure DOS text environment and a graphical one. This means it technically has a graphical user interface, but that graphic environment is doing its best to emulate a text environment.

            What you see is not what you get, at least in the main interface that you write in. There are font and size options for text, but all fonts and sizes will look the same until you view them through the programs print preview function. It actually was not until I got a hold of Word 6.0 and installed it that I even became aware there were any font options for the program. Only one font and size is installed by default. No fonts can even be installed unless you first install some kind of printer driver as well.

^ Graphic and text modes

            I guess Microsoft is assuming you'd have no reason to use different fonts and sizes unless you were going to be printing them. I can't design a document somewhere without a printer, save it, and bring it somewhere else to be printed? What if I just want to read from a font that pleases my eyes? After several attempts I was able to finally get a handful or so of fonts, along with several sizes for those fonts.

            Word 5.5/6.0 does have a genuine what-you-see-is-what-you-get print preview function, and writing this document was the very first time I've ever even tried that out. The things you've used for years but the features you've never had use for. I ended up going back to the print preview quite heavily while writing this review, as this was the only place I'd have a genuine idea of what it was going to turn out looking like.

            On the main writing screen itself, you have one font and size. Bold/Italics/Underline are shown on the main screen, and most things you'd want to do in terms of formatting can be gotten to easily enough through the mouse driven menu system. There's no "page view" of your actual writings while you're writing, and that has always been what I think of in terms of a true WYSIWYG processor. The background is blue, the text is grey, some more grey menus, a touch of CGA green, purple, and black in there for some things, though the colors can be customized.

            There are many screen mode options, I've always used a graphic, 30 line, 80 columns, and 16 color mode. There's a 50 line text mode, as well as a 60 line graphic mode available, amongst others, allowing you to see more of the screen at one time. After experimenting with all available modes, I found that the only graphical element in graphics mode is the mouse cursor. There are no items or menus that appear any different in text mode as opposed to graphics mode, only the mouse cursor. The mouse itself can be used in either mode, and using print preview in a text mode will switch to graphics mode.

^Extensive help menus, spell check, and the thesaurus

            The spell check in Word is not what it would become. Its spelling is not awful (though mine sure is), but there were numerous mistakes I made that it couldn't help me with. In terms of other contemporary word processors I've already dived into, I'd call Word's spell check better than WordPerfect, but worse than Excellence. While I've never been someone to use a thesaurus, the one built into Word looks to be fairly good, comparable to other word processors of the time, though probably not quite as good as WordPerfect in that area. You can insert tables (a 6.0 added feature), add bullet lists, macro's, and most other things you'd be wanting from a top class word processor of that time. There's even an option to add pictures into your document, though I didn't seem to have any types that Word supported.

            There's an extensive built-in help feature, there's even a file manager you can use to keep you out of DOS. I feel the file manager suffers from needing to manually input the path you want to manage. I had to "search" for a folder, and then input C:\docs to point it to my document directory. It seems to save it there at that point (for that session), but management is not as easy as surfing around with a mouse and going through directories. In the file management menu you can open, copy, delete, print, and rename your documents, all while staying inside of the program.

            File transferring can be a bit of an issue with Word. New documents saved using Word 5.5/6.0 will default to saving with a ".doc" extension. While it claims version parity with Word 6.0 for Windows, this is a lie. The Windows and DOS Word file formats are completely separate from each other. Using Word 6.0 for Windows to open a Word DOS file is simple enough, and for the most part will display everything correctly (including fonts/sizes). However, opening a file from Word 6.0 for Windows inside of DOS will have you reading gibberish.

            You have to make sure to change the file format in Windows to the DOS format, which at that point can be open and read in DOS. I still ran into some issues with that however, as when I went to continue writing, the text just kept going off to the right, never starting a new line, despite showing all of my previous lines correctly. When it comes to compatibility with newer versions of Word, I'd recommend you forget about it. Microsoft has long been notorious for incompatibility with versions of Word. I would give a hand of applause to WordPerfect in that category, which continues to allow you to read from and save to older versions that date back into the 1980's, with few issues. If you're looking to get a DOS 6.0 Word file into the newest version of Word you'd have to go through it all step by step.

^Save formats, compatibility, rich text

            You'd write a document using Word for DOS, but you'd need to then open it using Word 6.0 for Windows. At this point you'd either need Word 97, or a converter for Word 6.0 to save Word 97 files. At that point you could then open the file in a newer version of Word. The other way would be the same. Newer versions of Word can only save back as far as Word 97. Using Word 97 you'd save into Word 6.0 for Windows, and then using Word 6.0 for Windows you'd save it as a Word 6.0 DOS file (deep breath in, now exhale).

            A far easier way to go about transferring would be to save in the rich text file format. As far as my writing has been concerned, saving in rich text format has brought over all formatting/fonts/sizes over to new versions of Word (as well as many other word processors) just fine. If you're wanting to send something from a newer word processor to Word for DOS, rich text format seems to have you covered fairly well. If wanting transfers to or from a word processor without rich text formatting (such as most Amiga word processors), the ASCII standard is also available to read/write from Word for DOS by saving as a text file with breaks.

Pssst... Can I Have A Word With You? (Conclusions)

            Unlike the great George R.R. Martin, I can't say DOS is my ideal environment for word processing. I'd like to know what my document is going to look like while I'm actually writing it, and this awful speller feels a quality spell checker is essential to the word processing experience. Microsoft's Word for DOS in its 5.5 and 6.0 versions do not offer those essentials to me.

            I am however, full of tug and pull/love and hate feelings on MS-DOS. Blessed with the Amiga as my first computer, I am more than capable of putting down other computers and operating systems in very stinging ways. But like the majority of Amiga users, joining the PC market was but a matter of time. In the mid to late 1990's I had many wonderful experience using DOS, even learning to love it. It is both complex as well as simple. Nobody is going to just pick up and use DOS, they're not going to get anywhere unless they pass some basic computer literacy tests. Somehow I can manage to both love the Amiga for its graphical operating system that went above and beyond others, as well as love DOS for creating an environment where the user feels fully encompassed by the 1's and the 0's.

            Let's not just love one and hate the others, let's figure out the fun that can be had from them all. For that is an empirical truth, that fun can be had from all computers. With this in mind, I enjoyed my experience with Word for DOS. It has long been my preferred program to view readme files, as well as edit my autoexec and config system files. I would highly recommend any real DOS user who has need of reading documents inside of DOS or editing their system files use Word over the built in DOS editor. It has every single feature that you might happen to enjoy from Edit, like its speed or look, but it simply offers you so much more at the same time. Nobody could possibly regret using Word for these DOS functions. If you don't like using Edit, use Word, you'll like it better. If you've always felt like Edit was perfectly fine for what you needed it for, use Word, it's more fine.

^Words of wisdom, copy/paste, colors, WordPerfect help, file manager, printers

            In terms of using Word 5.5/6.0 in order to write your next, or perhaps first, novel? Well, countless people did (and some still seem to) write novels using DOS processors such as WordPerfect. Compared against DOS word processor competition, despite Word for DOS never making a dent in that market, I feel it might stand above them all. What you love from those processors is also here, and it even gives "a bit" of what many love from graphical processors. Personally, as a lover of WYSIWYG processors, I'm looking forward to a future look at the final version of WordPerfect for DOS, which I believe was the only true WYSIWYG DOS word processor. That's the kind of environment I'm looking for when it comes to writing anything that could be called substantial.

            If my future is to include an occasional review written entirely on DOS, much like I've written the occasional review entirely on the Amiga, I'd certainly prefer a word processor where I'd have a better idea at all times of what the final product would end up looking like. But perhaps the final version of WordPerfect won't end up "feeling" like DOS. Microsoft Word for DOS in its 5.5 and 6.0 versions offer up a nice compromise between something that undoubtedly still feels like DOS, while also giving you some features of the word processors that dominated graphical operating systems. Writing this review in particular, I had a load of fun, and I might even end up writing some more on it, from time to time.

            Hoping everyone will check out my video review for Microsoft Word for DOS, where I'll be taking you on a full tour of the program, showing its features, writing the very words that you're seeing here, as well as reading opinions of the time collected from 700 pages worth of early 1990's magazines. Before finishing this review I ended up doing the entire written review for the DOS game SkyRoads using Word, which perhaps you'd be interested in reading as well. Finally, if you're wanting some more word processing fun, I've also covered Excellence, as well as WordPerfect, both of them on the Amiga.

*My video review for Word 5.5/6.0

*Next article
*Previous article

*Alphabetical list of writings

*This review entirely written using Word 5.5/6.0 for DOS

End