This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

United States: Utah Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by WikiProject Utah (assessed as High-importance). Companies High‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Companies, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of companies 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.CompaniesWikipedia:WikiProject CompaniesTemplate:WikiProject Companiescompany High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. WikiProject Companies To-do: Here are some tasks awaiting attention: Article requests : Wikipedia:Requested articles/Business and economics/Companies Assess : Category:Unassessed company articles Copyedit : Category:Company articles needing attention Infobox : Category:Company articles needing infoboxes Maintain : Portal:Companies Stubs : Help expand stub articles located at Category:Company stubs Other : Tag company articles with the {{portal|Companies}} template Tag company talk pages with the {{WikiProject Companies}} project banner Answer requests for comments Computing: Software 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 High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by WikiProject Software (assessed as Top-importance).

Archives (Index)

2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2023

This page is archived by ClueBot III.

There was confusion in the article about how much Novell paid for the WordPerfect Corporation. A Washington Post article said $855 million in stock, but more (also very reliable) sources said $1.4 billion: NY Times, 2024, NY Times, 1994, Washington Post, 1994, Tidbits, 1994. I've removed the $855 million from the article. (Perhaps the discrepancy is because the $1.4 billion was in stock, and that stock is now worth only $855 million. If so, this isn't usually the way such things are normally reported, but possibly Novell was trying to spin its sale of WordPerfect to show a lower loss.) -- John Broughton (♫♫) 16:23, 5 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@John Broughton: Both figures are real and both can be given in the article to avoid confusion. When the deal was announced in March 1994, the Novell stock being exchanged was worth $1.4 billion. But Novell's stock price began a significant slide, in part because the market didn't believe in the acquisition; see this June 1994 Deseret News story for instance. By the time the deal actual closed in June 1994, the Novell stock being exchanged was only worth $855 million. See this Deseret News 1996 story or this 1996 RTG News item. Most subsequent news stories, including the originally cited WaPo 1996 one, use the $855 million figure. The NYT 2024 case you point to is an obit writer who found the March 1994 announced amount and either didn't look further or didn't think the revised closing amount was relevant. Wasted Time R (talk) 21:57, 5 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note that the contemporary reviews do not emphasize "show codes" as a special feature. Because that was a normal, expected, basic feature. As in almost every other normal, basic text processing program. Including Wordstar, the market leader.

I don't know when people started to think that "Show Codes" was a special feature of WordPerfect. Maybe as MS Word evolved into Word 6 and WordForWindows. People have certainly thought that since the turn of the century, but even then the idea was an anachronism. 1.159.83.148 (talk) 22:31, 16 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]