If I see a gap between two lines of text, and that gap vanishes when I commit the document to the web or save it to a file, then it’s not ‘WYSIWYG’. But this has been my experience with 100% of such editors.

I propose a new acronym to replace ‘wizzy-wig’:

WYSMBWYGIYLBIACWBFRTWNBMCTYSSIYUC

What You See Might Be What You Get if You’re Lucky but it Almost Certainly Won’t Be For Reasons That Will Never Be Made Clear to You So Suck it Ya Ugly Cunt

Not as pithy, but at least it’s accurate.

  • realitista@lemmus.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    11
    ·
    2 days ago

    Wow congratulations for dusting off the 36 year old marketing material! I’m not sure features in software respect 36 year statutes of limitation though. I suspect it no longer lives up to this claim. At least in my experience it doesn’t, unless you count only in print preview but not in actual editing.

    • Onomatopoeia@lemmy.cafe
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      2 days ago

      I don’t believe Word ever claimed to be WYSIWYG.

      Key word: ever

      It’s always been a WYSIWYG - hell, one could argue it popularized the term.

      • realitista@lemmus.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        2 days ago

        Fair enough they got me on the semantics of my statement. I still don’t believe the functionality is still there though.

        • village604@adultswim.fan
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          2 days ago

          And antivaxers believe that vaccines cause autism.

          Believing something doesn’t make it true.

      • realitista@lemmus.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        2 days ago

        Everyone else here is getting the same page layout from Word in print that they see on the screen!?! Honestly more surprised than anything. I don’t remember it ever happening.

        • ChaoticNeutralCzech@feddit.org
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          edit-2
          2 days ago

          With default settings, I do. Every document I remember. The only difference is semitransparent header and footer in the GUI. Maybe you’ve enabled the fullscreen/reader view that usually breaks everything, or it’s default on web or mobile.

          I achieved high proficiency with Office 2013 and honestly, it’s not fully WYSIWYG, you have to do things like toggle field codes for some advanced stuff but 99.9 % of work done by Word users is in WYSIWYG mode. As for what-you-see-is-what-you-want? Well, hard no.

        • null@piefed.nullspace.lol
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          2 days ago

          Who said anything like that?

          But also yes. If you’re viewing a Word doc in page view, it’s going to look the same when you print it.

          That’s true for when you use it as well. Apparently your memory is terrible.

    • egrets@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 days ago

      Hah, just a quick search for the image, but the point is that your average word processor is WYSIWYG – so much so that the phrase has fallen out of fashion, because any other concept (e.g. a TeX client like LaTeX) is foreign to your typical user. You edit the formatted document directly, and it’ll always look the same on screen and print as it did at the point of edit.

      Granted you can enable alternate views in MS Word, like draft layout or web layout, but they’re not the default.