This seems like more of a typing contest than anything else. Reproducing a single page of an already-typeset document is not what LaTeX is designed for, nor is it what scientists do for a living. The test selections were absurdly short relative to the typical scientic manuscript. Long and complex documents are where LaTeX excels. And this did not call upon some of the most important (IMHO) capabilities of LaTeX: managing citations with BibTex; changing the style to suit different journals; storing, revisiting, and reusing your document years later.
--Chris Ryan Ken Mankoff wrote: > > People here might be interested in a publication from [2014-12-19 Fri] > available at http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0115069 > > Title: An Efficiency Comparison of Document Preparation Systems Used > in Academic Research and Development > > Summary: Word users are more efficient and have less errors than even > experienced LaTeX users. > > Someone here should repeat experiment and add Org into the mix, perhaps > Org -> ODT and/or Org -> LaTeX and see if it helps or hurts. I assume > Org would trump LaTeX, but would Org -> ODT or Org -> X -> DOCX (via > pandoc) beat straight Word? > > -k. > >