Byfield, Bruce. “Linux.com.” Online Word Processors: A Hands-On Comparison. N.p., 5 Sept. 2006. Web. 22 Nov. 2014. <http://archive09.linux.com/articles/114171>.

Bruce Byfield discusses word processing in his article “Online Word Processors: A Hands-On Comparison.” This article, written for people looking for information and advice on which word processors to use, compares four online word processing applications: ajazWrite, ThinkFree Online, Writely, and Zoho Writer, in the following categories: interfaces, basic formatting tools, advanced formatting tools and unique features, and document export and administration. Byfield outlines how each word processor addresses these word processing needs and compares their performance. At the end of each section Byfield declares a verdict, stating which processor he believes does its job the best in each category. In his conclusion Byfield makes a general comparison the word processors and is quick to point out that online word processors were still in their early stages, as the article was published in 2006. Byfield claims that online word processors were a regression, that their simplicity and reliance on the internet made them less efficient than other word processors.

Bruce Byfield is a computer journalist focusing on free and open source software. He has written over 1,200 articles for a variety of online journals and other websites. His past work includes working at as a university English professor and technical writer, as well as communications, marketing, and design consultant. His bias in “Online Word Processors: A Hands-On Comparison” is that of a person who is well-versed in word processing technicalities and has expectations for maximum efficiency in the programs he uses. This article has some weaknesses in that it is a short article and does not provide outside resources for the reader to go to to find more information. While its 2006 publishing date could be seen as a weakness because word processing has changed significantly since then, I believe it can be seen as a strength for our project. Seeing reviews of word processors in their early days can be very informative to the creators of White Space as they decide which features people have found most and least appealing in word processors throughout the years. Part of White Space’s goal is to give users the option to revert to a simpler software if needed, and this article provides ample information about older word processors and their relationship with the internet. Use of this source in our research would strongly support White Space’s thesis that the ideal processor takes the best from word processors already available.

Collier, Richard M. “The Word Processor and Revision Strategies.” College Composition and Communication 34.2 (1983): 149-55. JSTOR. Web. 23 Nov. 2014. <http://www.jstor.org/stable/10.2307/357402?ref=no-x-route:eae95b932ea3538933238188507e6a01>.

In his 1983 article “The Word Processor and Revision Strategies,” Richard Collier outlines a hypothesis about the way using a word processor will affect the editing process for students. The intended audience was fellow educators that were possibly looking to incorporate word processing into their curriculum. Collier predicts the word processing revision process will be difficult for those who are less computer-savvy and that they will stick to smaller revisions and only use the simplest features in the processor. He then tests his hypothesis on four female writers between nineteen and thirty-two years old, asking them to revise handwritten essays on word processors. Collier finds that the revision process was very difficult for those who were less computer-literate, but resulted in more active revisions and slightly longer, more experimental essays. He decides that his hypothesis was wrong because the changes in the essays were not as significant as he had predicted. At the end of the article Collier claims that word processing has a long way to go before it is an efficient process, but if students learn how to use it well they will benefit from it immensely.

Since the article was published by The National Council of Teachers of English, I can deduct that Collier was an English educator. His bias is that of an educator; he wants word processing to be a tool that enhances student writing. One weakness of this article, which basically outlines an experiment in word processing, is that Collier only tested four students, all of which were adult women. This does not provide a wide scope for the way word processing was used by students, it just gives a narrow glimpse into Collier’s classroom. The early article publication, 1983, limited the processing software that Collier could use as well. However, this article gives an interesting insight to the way people expected word processors to develop. In a time when word processors were still very new and had almost no precedent, Collier provides an academic’s goals and wishes for the future of the word processor. For White Space it is essential to go back to the original goals and intentions of word processors in order to find out what is needed to apply to its design.