Final readthrough tweaks.

docs/finalpaper/texreport.bib

@@ -22,6 +22,12 @@ @misc{rubyqt
    annote = {Provides an overview of the Ruby Qt project.},
 }
 
+@misc{nano,
+   url   = {http://www.nano-editor.org/},
+   title = {GNU nano},
+   annote = {Provides an overview of the text editor Nano.},
+}
+
 @misc{writeroom,
    url   = {http://www.hogbaysoftware.com/products/writeroom},
    title = {WriteRoom -- Distraction free writing software for Mac},

docs/finalpaper/texreport.tex

@@ -18,7 +18,7 @@
 \begin{abstract}
 My senior project was spent building a desktop application similar to WriteRoom and OmmWriter. These two applications are both word processors for the Macintosh OS X operating system. Both of these applications are designed to be a reset on word processing software, bringing their interfaces back to the days of Microsoft Word 3.0 and Word Perfect. They do this by spending more time on focusing on the design of the software interface, and focusing on keeping it minimalistic, instead of filling the product with new obscure features, which is a common complaint against the current iterations of Microsoft Word.
 
-The final application, named coffee\_shop, ended up not meeting my expectations. Having spent most of my education developing applications for the internet, instead of the desktop, I ran into pitfalls which, if this had been an internet application, wouldn't have been problematic.
+The final application, named coffee\_shop, ended up not meeting my expectations. Having spent most of my education developing applications for the internet, instead of the desktop, I ran into pitfalls which, if this had been an internet application, wouldn't have been as problematic.
 \end{abstract}
 
 % Table of Contents
@@ -40,19 +40,19 @@
 
 \section{Introduction}
 
-Depending on the job, people use different tools. Some tools are incredibly specialised, such as post hole diggers and PVC pipe warmers. Others are much more generic, such as hammers and cameras. Notice though, that in the hardware world, the majority of tools serve one job. That job, such as hammering, can be applied to a wide variety of ways (hammering in a nail, breaking apart structures, putting stakes in the ground). In the software world, historically tools have been built to be much more generic. Microsoft Word for example not only let you write documents, but also create spreadsheets, resumes and many other things. While this has let Microsoft make more money by selling their software to a wider variety of needs, it has created software that is hard to use and hard to maintain. To fight this, companies and individuals are starting to create software that have less features and are easier to use.
+Depending on the job, people use different tools. Some tools are incredibly specialised, such as post hole diggers and PVC pipe warmers. Others are much more generic, such as hammers and cameras. Notice though, that in the hardware world, the majority of tools serve one job. That job, such as hammering, can be applied to a wide variety of ways (hammering in a nail, breaking apart structures, putting stakes in the ground). In the software world, tools have historically been built to be much more generic. Microsoft Word, for example, not only let the user write documents, but also let them create spreadsheets, resumes and many other things. While this has let Microsoft make more money by selling their software to a wider variety of users, it has created software that is hard to use and hard to maintain. To fight this, companies and individuals are starting to create software that have less features, are easier to use and focus on solving one specific problem.
 
 \section{Problem description}
 
-The problem coffee\_shop tries to tackle is whether or not developing a desktop application focused on writing, instead of formating, is a good idea.
+The problem coffee\_shop tries to tackle is whether or not developing a desktop application focused on writing, instead of formatting, is a good idea.
 
 \section{Survey of relevant work}
 
-Before starting the project, I surveyed a variety of word processor programs and interviewed individuals about their writing habits. The survey I distributed was simple and open-ended. I asked users what types of documents they wrote, what they disliked about their current word processor and what they liked and wanted in their word processor.
+Before starting the project, I surveyed a variety of word processing programs and interviewed individuals about their writing habits. The survey I distributed was simple and open-ended. I asked users what types of documents they wrote, what they disliked about their current word processor and what they liked and wanted in their word processor.
 
-I discovered that there were two groups of users of word processors in my survey group. There were those who wrote in a corporate or academic environment and those that wrote for themselves. The users that wrote more for academia and corporate positions tended to want lots of formatting options. Users writing for themselves usually wanted something that hid everything and let them just write.
+I discovered that there were two groups of users of word processors in my survey group. There were those who wrote in a corporate or academic environment and those that wrote for themselves. The users that wrote more for academia and corporate positions tended to want lots of formatting options. Users who wrote for themselves or wrote fiction usually wanted something that hid everything and let them just write.
 
-Every single one of my responders despised Microsoft Word's auto-correct but still wanted spell check.
+Every single one of my responders despised Microsoft Word's auto-correct but thought spell check was the most essential feature any word processor could have.
 
 I decided to name my user group Johnny, based on two different people that I interviewed and the responses from my survey. Johnny writes fiction in his free time and aspires to be a writer. He is currently employed doing other things, so he uses his word processor as he commutes and during his time off. Most of what Johnny writes tends to be one or two pages, but he has been known to turn out novels depending on his mood.
 
@@ -62,15 +62,15 @@ \subsection{Professional Offerings}
 
 \subsubsection{Microsoft Word 2010}
 
-Microsoft Word 2010 is a pretty expansive program. It easily has more features and options than any of the other products I tested.
+Microsoft Word 2010 is a powerful and expansive program. It has far more features and options than any of the other products I tested.
 
 \begin{figure}
    \centering
       \includegraphics[width=130mm]{images/BlankWord.png}
    \caption{Microsoft Word 2010 with no text.}
 \end{figure}
 
-Its while it has a relatively easy to interpret selection of main controls on the top of the page, most options are hidden under a variety of menus. Disabling features that many who I surveyed complained about, such as auto-correct, took a few minutes to find the right check box.
+While Word has a selection of main controls at the top of the page that are relatively easy to interpret, most of the options and features are hidden under a variety of menus. Disabling features that many of my surveyees complained about, such as auto-correct, took a few minutes. This was because it was hard to find the right check box or drop down in Word's maze of menus.
 
 \begin{figure}
    \centering
@@ -82,15 +82,15 @@ \subsubsection{Microsoft Word 2010}
 
 \subsubsection{Microsoft Word 5.5}
 
-Originally released in 1991\cite{infoworld}, Microsoft Word 5.5 is an interesting beast. 5.5's initial downside is that it needs to be run in DosBox. The cool thing about DosBox though, is that it means I can run 5.5 on Linux and on just about every other machine that it supports. But 5.5 comes from before the days where everything is just one executable. The user install experience is incredibly slow and time consuming. 5.5 extracts four hundred files before setup, and then another two hundred during the install process.
+Originally released in 1991\cite{infoworld}, Microsoft Word 5.5 is an interesting beast. 5.5's initial downside is that it needs to be run in DosBox. The cool thing about DosBox though, is that it means I can run 5.5 on Linux and on just about every other machine that it supports. But 5.5 comes from before the days where everything is just one executable. The user install experience is incredibly slow and time consuming. 5.5 extracts approximately four hundred files before setup, and then another two hundred during the install process.
 
 \begin{figure}
    \centering
       \includegraphics[width=130mm]{images/w55_1.png}
    \caption{Microsoft Word 5.5.}
 \end{figure}
 
-Once you are inside 5.5, the experience is relatively nice. Document navigation was done entirely via the keyboard. It reminded me a lot of Pico, and was a joy to use. The user can also select text with the mouse, and we can see how the experience in 5.5 turned into that of Microsoft Word 2010.
+Once you are inside 5.5, the experience is relatively nice. Document navigation was done entirely via the keyboard. It reminded me a lot of Nano\cite{nano}, and was a joy to use. The user can also select text with the mouse, and we can see how the experience in 5.5 turned into that of Microsoft Word 2010.
 
 5.5 offered no color or font customizations, although the user could go full screen, which was very nice. Page breaks were implied with an emphasized dotted line.