» » Random House Webster's Unabridged Dictionary CD-ROM (ver 2.1)

Random House Webster's Unabridged Dictionary CD-ROM (ver 2.1) epub download

by Random House


The CD-ROM version in 1994 also included 120,000 spoken pronunciations.

Random House Webster’s Dictionary is your one-stop reference book. No other paperback dictionary gives you more! Keep Reading

The dictionary also Random House Webster's unabridged dictionary with CD-Rom.

The dictionary also Random House Webster's unabridged dictionary with CD-Rom. New York: Random House. Citation by: Tonya Saylor. There are more definitions per word than other leading dictionaries.

I recently purchased the Random House unabridged dictionary on CD ro.

I recently purchased the Random House unabridged dictionary on CD rom. I have found this very useful. I use it frequently when writing papers for school. Using cutting-edge technology, Random House is able to bring you Newer Words Faster.

Includes identical content on CD-ROM. System requirements for accompanying computer disc (version 2): PC (80486 or higher); 8 Mb RAM; 3 Mb free space on hard. System requirements for accompanying computer disc (version 2): PC (80486 or higher); 8 Mb RAM; 3 Mb free space on hard drive; Microsoft Windows . or later; CD-ROM drive (2x or faster); Windows compatible mouse and sound card; speakers.

Mariam Webster offers this feature. Results 1–2 of 2. 1. Please Wait. Summary:Count: 0 of 1,000 characters. The posting of advertisements, profanity, or personal attacks is prohibited.

Random House Webster's Unabridged Dictionary CD-ROM (ver 2.1) epub download

ISBN13: 978-0375401961

ISBN: 0375401962

Author: Random House

Category: No category

Language: English

Publisher: Random House Reference (November 29, 1997)

ePUB size: 1502 kb

FB2 size: 1613 kb

Rating: 4.9

Votes: 610

Other Formats: mbr lit mobi lit

Related to Random House Webster's Unabridged Dictionary CD-ROM (ver 2.1) ePub books

Faegal
Random House WUA is a fine dictionary - no question about it. The touted 2003 release is actually the now four year old 1999 edition. One click at Help->About is enough. Even file dates are from 1999. It was probably tested for Win XP/2000 compatibility and then re-released.
Still - the best Unabridged Speaking computer dictionary I know.
Faegal
Random House WUA is a fine dictionary - no question about it. The touted 2003 release is actually the now four year old 1999 edition. One click at Help->About is enough. Even file dates are from 1999. It was probably tested for Win XP/2000 compatibility and then re-released.
Still - the best Unabridged Speaking computer dictionary I know.
Sharpbinder
It appears on screen quickly and gives a lot of good, pertinent example sentences. It is much easier to read than Oxford University Press's "Oxford English Dictionary," which has a lot of words but is hard to read because of the poor layout and color scheme.
Sharpbinder
It appears on screen quickly and gives a lot of good, pertinent example sentences. It is much easier to read than Oxford University Press's "Oxford English Dictionary," which has a lot of words but is hard to read because of the poor layout and color scheme.
Ginaun
I can't believe how bad the user interface is for this

product, and even though I bought it to replace a nearly

10 year old "Talking American Heritage Dictionary", I'm

likely going to stick with the old one!

The "About" information reveals what's going on here--the

copyrights are for 1999, and there are even notices about

"for 16 bit Windows"; we're talking pretty ancient software.

The dictionary itself is pretty standard; there are plenty

of entries, and a nice layout. There is good use of bold,

color, and italics, which makes for easier reading. The

dictionary guesses when you type most of the word you are

looking for. You can hit "Enter" without finishing the typing,

and the word appears.

It didn't handle misspellings well. I tried to look up

"mnemonic" by entering, "mnumonic". The dictionary responds

with "M. Nurs", and offers no suggestions. The AHD, on the

other hand, suggested I try "mnemonic" (which is the correct

word), when I entered the same thing.

The dictionary sometimes adds words you look up into a history.

Sometimes it doesn't. I have yet to figure out when it decides

to add, and when not.

The buttons are not organized well, and the shortcuts actually

conflict with the menus. I tried to exit by hitting ALT-F,X

(standard Window's UI), and instead brought up a filtering

window. Strangely, only filter and Prefs have a keyboard

shortcut--the other 7 buttons have none.

There is no click to find a word! This is terrible. I looked

up "PC", and it says "See Personal Computer". Why can't I click

on "Personal Computer"? I have to type it all out (yes, you can

copy/paste). There is no excuse for this in a software

dictionary.

Mouse scrolling does not work, nor does drag-scrolling (you don't

get realtime movement by dragging the scrollbar.). You either

have to move line by line, or move the scrollbar, let go, and

hope you've gone the distance you wanted.

If you just want to read definitions on your PC, this dictionary

will work. But the American Heritage is just as cheap, and works

much better.
Ginaun
I can't believe how bad the user interface is for this

product, and even though I bought it to replace a nearly

10 year old "Talking American Heritage Dictionary", I'm

likely going to stick with the old one!

The "About" information reveals what's going on here--the

copyrights are for 1999, and there are even notices about

"for 16 bit Windows"; we're talking pretty ancient software.

The dictionary itself is pretty standard; there are plenty

of entries, and a nice layout. There is good use of bold,

color, and italics, which makes for easier reading. The

dictionary guesses when you type most of the word you are

looking for. You can hit "Enter" without finishing the typing,

and the word appears.

It didn't handle misspellings well. I tried to look up

"mnemonic" by entering, "mnumonic". The dictionary responds

with "M. Nurs", and offers no suggestions. The AHD, on the

other hand, suggested I try "mnemonic" (which is the correct

word), when I entered the same thing.

The dictionary sometimes adds words you look up into a history.

Sometimes it doesn't. I have yet to figure out when it decides

to add, and when not.

The buttons are not organized well, and the shortcuts actually

conflict with the menus. I tried to exit by hitting ALT-F,X

(standard Window's UI), and instead brought up a filtering

window. Strangely, only filter and Prefs have a keyboard

shortcut--the other 7 buttons have none.

There is no click to find a word! This is terrible. I looked

up "PC", and it says "See Personal Computer". Why can't I click

on "Personal Computer"? I have to type it all out (yes, you can

copy/paste). There is no excuse for this in a software

dictionary.

Mouse scrolling does not work, nor does drag-scrolling (you don't

get realtime movement by dragging the scrollbar.). You either

have to move line by line, or move the scrollbar, let go, and

hope you've gone the distance you wanted.

If you just want to read definitions on your PC, this dictionary

will work. But the American Heritage is just as cheap, and works

much better.
Doulkree
It is certainly totally different from the paper version and looks just like any other electronic dictionary. I found it useful but the interface is quite elementary and could be much better for that price.
Doulkree
It is certainly totally different from the paper version and looks just like any other electronic dictionary. I found it useful but the interface is quite elementary and could be much better for that price.
Villo
This dictionary does not live up to its advertisement. The instructions on how to use its advertised features are next to non-existent. When I finally figured it out for myself by cut-and-try, I wondered whether it had been worth the effort. Sorry!
Villo
This dictionary does not live up to its advertisement. The instructions on how to use its advertised features are next to non-existent. When I finally figured it out for myself by cut-and-try, I wondered whether it had been worth the effort. Sorry!