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

CotEditor – Text Editor for OS X

coteditor.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

181–190 of 198 posts

Re: CotEditor – Text Editor for OS X

#181

Post by agilebyte »

jasonkester wrote: post #161
nl wrote: post #160

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Perhaps somethings are more valuable than money to some?

Money isn't what we're optimizing though. It's freedom. Having a software product as income source means you don't have to have a day job working for somebody else. It means you can spend your time doing whatever you want, be that working on your own personal projects, surfing, traveling or, yes, earning more money. You can even choose to build open source Mac text editors and give them away for free. It's your choic…

I am not saying that someone should give me products of their labor for free, I am trying to imagine why someone would.

One explanation, like you point out, is that they are free to work on a project such as CotEditor because they are financially secure.

Re: CotEditor – Text Editor for OS X

#182

Post by Demiurge »

tkubacki wrote: post #115
plg wrote: post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

how is battery life? Last time I tried installing linux on a macbook pro (1) the machine ran hot all the time and (2) the battery life was seriously reduced compared to using os x. Have things improved? Might be time to try again?

I think it' not much worse than osx but can't say anything for sure - I usually work with power cord (just sometimes in customer's office)

I really have no idea why someone would downvote your honest answer.... This is getting out of hand.

Anyway, in my experience it's been about 50-70% worse battery life on ubuntu compared to OSX. Which, as you point out, is no issue if you don't need all 4 or 8 hours of the full potential of MacBook battery life. A meeting might last 2 hours for me at most, but if traveling, battery life is a deal breaker for me.

Re: CotEditor – Text Editor for OS X

#183

Post by saralily »

fredsted wrote: post #158
unicornporn wrote: post #154

Nice looking. But I can't use it as is now — it has no tabs/sidebar for more documents. TextWrangler FTW. I actually run Notepad++ via Wine too for HTML. It's the only editor I've found that can expand and contract a hierarchy of *ML using plus and minus signs in the marginal of the editor. Difficult to explain, I guess you have to try it to understand. It's indispensable and I can't be without it. I'd love to go nat…

TextWrangler and TextMate has it.

Buy BBEdit.

Re: CotEditor – Text Editor for OS X

#186

Post by JadeNB »

Tloewald wrote: post #177
JadeNB wrote: post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The one thing I do not consistently use are modal keyboard-centric editors like vim and emacs. As a vim-er and not an Emacs-er, asking genuinely and not out of snark, surely Emacs is eminently non- modal (at least, not modal in the same way that vim is)?

https://www.gnu.org/software/emacs/manual/html_node/emacs/Ma... emacs has plenty of modes, although actually that's not really my big problem with emacs (or vim) when I think more about it. It's needing to remember stuff rather than recognize and select (which is the fundamental advantage of GUI, if you don't like remembering things). Most of the stuff I see vim/emacs-ers boast about are easily achievable by me with…

> emacs has plenty of modes ….

This is not the sense in which vim is called a modal editor—at least, I think of it as meaningfully different. In different Emacs major modes, for example, the tab key might create different indentations; but, in different vim modes, the 'x' key might remove a character (in normal mode) or insert an 'x' character (in insert mode).

I think of the statement "vim is a modal editor" as "vim replaced key chords with mode toggles"—a different editor would replace "press 'x' in normal mode" by something like "press 'M-x'."

Again, I am certainly aware that Emacs modes can do much more than just offer context-sensitive indentation, but my impression (as a non-Emacs-er) is that they are usually meant to offer subtle customisation rather than full-scale re-engineering of the editor.

Re: CotEditor – Text Editor for OS X

#187

Post by halflings »

alextgordon wrote: post #178
halflings wrote: post #170

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The auto complete in Chocolat is just mind-blowing. Unfortunately I really miss all the keyboard friendly features in Sublime (CMD+P then write the name of a file; CMD+SHIFT+P and write a command). I think if you had those implemented many Sublime users may consider switching to Chocolat. (then there are also features that may be harder to implement, like Sublime's search and multi-cursor selection)

CMD-P is CMD-D CMD-SHIFT-P is CMD-SHIFT-D Multicursor find is CTRL-F, CTRL-SHIFT-F and CTRL-ALT-F I guess what it really needs are a set of sublime keybindings.

Great! Seems like I missed on a lot :)

Maybe another suggestion would be executing (Python) programs in the main interface instead of executing them in the terminal.

Re: CotEditor – Text Editor for OS X

#188

Post by source99 »

0942v8653 wrote: post #79
Walkman wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't know how it could be easier: You position inside a word anywhere, press CMD+OPTION+G; the next word is already selected, you can already edit it, no need to bring up Find panel.

Or double-tap Command+D.

This doesn't seem to work well as it highlights multiple instances of the word I was on. The current instance and the next instance(but not all instances).

Re: CotEditor – Text Editor for OS X

#189

Post by source99 »

Walkman wrote: post #74
source99 wrote: post #71

Why is 'find' so horribly difficult to use in sublime? I want to find another instance of the current word and then quickly modify it. I wish getting out of the find text box was simpler and more intuitive. Maybe it's just me.

I don't know how it could be easier: You position inside a word anywhere, press CMD+OPTION+G; the next word is already selected, you can already edit it, no need to bring up Find panel.

This does seem to work but its pretty painful key combination on my mac keyboard.

Re: CotEditor – Text Editor for OS X

#190

Post by cooper12 »

rossy wrote: post #165
cooper12 wrote: post #147

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You underestimate the difficulty of compiling from source for the layman. OSX and Windows do not come with compilers out of the box. The user would have to install them and the proper environment for them first. (cygwin, etc...) Then they'd have to get and install the dependencies properly. Finally they'd have to figure out the proper incantations to make it compile, which if you've never done it before can be extrem…

The problem is, only one person has to figure out how to build it, then if it's real free and open source software, they're legally allowed to distribute their own unofficial builds over the internet. The original XChat developer decided that it was too much effort to develop XChat for Windows, so he charged for it, which resulted in silverex's free X-Chat 2 builds and the HexChat fork. I don't think users respond we…

Hmm I didn't think about that. I guess that's a genuine option for popular applications. Personally, for some unpopular applications I've tried to compile, I just gave up if the standard `./configure && make` didn't work.

As for your second point, I think it comes down to two things: if the user's time is more valuable than their money, and two, if they can get support for the paid product (at least that's how I've seen some products doing it), so it's not as if the paid is without it's benefits. Your Hexchat example shows how important it is to not alienate your users though.

Post reply on HN