Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Sublime Text 3 Beta

sublimetext.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

311–320 of 374 posts

Re: Sublime Text 3 Beta

#311

Post by drivebyacct2 »

pretoriusB wrote: post #265
illumen wrote: post #130

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Linux/ARM is bigger than iphone, apple, and dell combined. Android. It's sitting on a desk near you.

> Linux/ARM is bigger than iphone, apple, and dell combined.Android. It's sitting on a desk near you. Most Android devices are sold free with contract or with low tier phones to people who don't care much about smartphones. As for Android tablets, they don't sell that well, period. That's the huge majority of Android users. A minor one is geeks like us, open source fans, etc, that prefer it to iOS. (And that still le…

You didn't even make it one whole sentence with a correct statement. You stink of an OSS troll in this thread.

There have been plenty of interest in Sublime Text 2 builds for Android, I've seen people ask about it for both the Exynos Chromebook and the jailbroken Surface RT.

Amazingly, I can use ALL of my desktop software (except VirtualBox) on Linux/ARM and it's just like using an Intel machine. The only thing missing are proprietary apps like ST that can't have an ARM build generate for it automatically.

Re: Sublime Text 3 Beta

#312

Post by nkozyra »

akirk wrote: post #238
nkozyra wrote: post #233

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not sure "I waste money in even more ridiculous ways" is necessarily a good defense.

I think it is a valid point. If it provides the value to you. I don't get these price discussions. If you earn your money by programming, I think it is crazy to be cheap on your tools if you can get the job better done using them. If you program occasionally, then use some free open source editor. People on construction sites don't use the cheapest tools available for a reason. If you use it to earn money, you should…

The valid point is "it's worth it to me," not "lots of other things with less value cost as much or more and I willingly pay for those, too."

If you tell me a Ford Taurus costs $40,000, justifying that by telling you I spent $100,000 on a broken bike doesn't make the former a good deal.

The way I see it, $70 on its own is meaningless. A lot of people are taken aback because it feels like $70 for an advanced text editor. And in many ways, it is that with some IDE flair built-in.

I own a license and honestly still find myself in Notepad++ for a bunch of things. As a professional programmer, I have come to the conclusion that for my purposes it's overpriced. Your mileage ... well, it should vary.

Re: Sublime Text 3 Beta

#313

Post by Corrado »

codex wrote: post #69

I am pleased to see this app written in C++11. I hope it will inspire others to create more fast, beautiful, cross platform apps with the language.

I have been curious for a while about how ST 2|3 is architected. I know it uses C++ but how does it work so well as cross-platform application. Does that stem from being built in C++? What UI framework does it use?

Re: Sublime Text 3 Beta

#314

Post by Dirlewanger »

swah wrote: post #191
veidr wrote: post #166

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I just opened a 49.8MB log file and the ST3 beta took 6 seconds to open it. The app can open/edit other files while this initial loading happens. For fun I tried some other editors (this is on OS X): BBEdit 10.5: instant vim 7.3: instant TextEdit 1.8: instant Textmate 2.0.0a9351: hung the entire app for 15 seconds ST2: 9 seconds So yeah, ST3 still seems to fare pretty poorly in this regard.

Probably something related to the new symbol parsing?

Doubt it. Problem exists in ST2 as well. I have a ~200MB ETL file I've been working with recently...takes ST2 around 20 seconds to open it.

Re: Sublime Text 3 Beta

#315

Post by gknoy »

Silhouette wrote: post #301
radiac wrote: post #175

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not a direct and honest way of asking people to pay for Sublime Text - it's an indirect way of asking people to continue to pay for something they thought they'd already bought. I paid for Sublime Text 2 with the expectation of continued support of the quality we had during beta, but instead we have waited months for bug fixes which have never arrived. ST2 was essentially abandoned after it left beta, and now we…

I paid for Sublime Text 2 with the expectation of continued support of the quality we had during beta, but instead we have waited months for bug fixes which have never arrived. Rationally, as a software guy, this seems somehow unfair. After all, even as it was launched and without any further changes, ST2 is a good product at a low price. But the reality is that I feel the same way as radiac. When I chose to spend re…

I felt this way about Ultra-Edit32 for a long time on Windows. I bought in college, and I believe it had a "... and future upgrades are automatically free" clause. It made me have a LOT of faith that this would be a useful and awesome product, and I was a happy user for many years. (In a sense, I bought it twice, as I asked my employer to buy it for me later.)

As a prospective user of Sublime Text (3, now), it's interesting to think about how I would feel had I bought ST2 a year ago, and now felt compelled to upgrade. The price is semi-negligible, in terms of how much one pays for a quality tool -- it's a fraction of the price of Komodo IDE or PyCharm, for example -- but the hassle is still annoying.

As Silhouette points out, it really makes one wonder about how long "support" (bugfixes, etc) will last for the current version. I think one of the more interesting questions to arise from this thread has been what the difference is (or should be?) between a point release (vN.5) and version N+1.

Re: Sublime Text 3 Beta

#316

Post by shocks »

streptomycin wrote: post #282
shocks wrote: post #230

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If people want it without paying they will get it without paying anyway. I say open source it, but continue to sell licenses for it.

You can already get it without paying for it, it just bugs you to buy a license every now and again.

Huh? That's besides the point.

My point is that just because it's commercial software doesn't mean it should be closed source. If it was open source it could be 'easier to steal', but I bet most people seriously using it would still buy it. Anybody that took the time to patch the source would never have bought it anyway - so there is nothing lost.

I'm not sure why I'm getting down voted. For a bunch of open source evangelists that's pretty hypocritical.

Re: Sublime Text 3 Beta

#317

Post by ditoa »

SCdF wrote: post #149

I'm not near a computer at the moment, can any body tell me how the performance is with very large files (>20mb) compared to the previous releases? If there was one thing that disappointed me about ST2 it was that it wasn't very competent with massive log files and the like. ATM I use an ide for Java, ST2 for nearly everything else (other languages, random text) and less / vi / others for logs and other massive files…

Sublime was never very good with large files in my experience. UltraEdit has always been the best for that (if you are a Windows user, I don't know if the Mac and Linux versions perform as well).

Re: Sublime Text 3 Beta

#318

Post by forrestthewoods »

marcusf wrote: post #158
forrestthewoods wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why do you need ST to be involved in building? I use ST for all text editing and then click the build button where ever it may lie - python script file, Xcode, or VisualStudio. You do lose the ability to jump to the exact line an error is on which is a mild nuisance but nearly enough to make me stop using ST.

I think you're reading that wrong. OP asks for a ST build for Linux/ARM (i.e. an executable that works on that platform).

...I get what I deserve for posting at 3am. I am an idiot. Thanks for the clarification. :)

Re: Sublime Text 3 Beta

#319

Post by rayiner »

pretoriusB wrote: post #245
edanm wrote: post #177

Here's what I'd love someone to organize: A Kickstarter campaign to raise enough money to pay the ST developer to make ST open-source. If ST becomes open-source, that solves one of the biggest issues many people have with ST, especially those coming from a vim/emacs background. This is something I know I would pay for, and I believe others would as well.

> If ST becomes open-source, that solves one of the biggest issues many people have with ST, especially those coming from a vim/emacs background. And it makes ST another bloody Open Source project, designed by a community, to fall by the wayside and stagnate like Gnome, Emacs, Vim etc...

I'd imagine there are way more Emacs/Vim users than SublimeText users or even Textmate users at it's peak.

Re: Sublime Text 3 Beta

#320

Post by SCdF »

veidr wrote: post #166
SCdF wrote: post #149

I'm not near a computer at the moment, can any body tell me how the performance is with very large files (>20mb) compared to the previous releases? If there was one thing that disappointed me about ST2 it was that it wasn't very competent with massive log files and the like. ATM I use an ide for Java, ST2 for nearly everything else (other languages, random text) and less / vi / others for logs and other massive files…

I just opened a 49.8MB log file and the ST3 beta took 6 seconds to open it. The app can open/edit other files while this initial loading happens. For fun I tried some other editors (this is on OS X): BBEdit 10.5: instant vim 7.3: instant TextEdit 1.8: instant Textmate 2.0.0a9351: hung the entire app for 15 seconds ST2: 9 seconds So yeah, ST3 still seems to fare pretty poorly in this regard.

Bah, yeah, so that's my biggest gripe with ST.. it seems to want to load the whole file into memory before it lets you work with it. I'm not sure if that's a philosophical thing or a limitation of how ST works, but it's really annoying.

If he worked out a robust way to have file open performance on par with the likes of vim then I'd upgrade in a heartbeat.

Post reply on HN