[HN Gopher] BBEdit: Where Respect Is Due
___________________________________________________________________
BBEdit: Where Respect Is Due
Author : tambourine_man
Score : 609 points
Date : 2023-06-13 00:23 UTC (22 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (apps.apple.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (apps.apple.com)
| oblib wrote:
| Most of my daily work is done with BBEdit and has been for over
| 25 years now.
|
| They saved my butt last year when my old Mac Mini melted down. I
| had another old Mac Mini a friend gave me and when I contacted
| BBEdit they gave me a copy to get me back up and running without
| any hesitation even though I couldn't give them my serial number.
|
| Nothing but respect for them.
| esjeon wrote:
| I was curious and visited their website:
| https://www.barebones.com/products/bbedit/ >
| BBEdit 14 > > It doesn't suck.(r)
|
| Dang, I love it. The feature list looks good enough to back the
| claim. It almost sounds like an editor for Linux. And I'm also
| curious if there are any Linux alternatives?
| ycombinete wrote:
| What is the analogue of BBEdit on Windows? On Linux I guess it's
| things like EMacs, and Vim?
| AndroidKitKat wrote:
| Perhaps Notepad++?
| HeckFeck wrote:
| I liked Programmer's Notepad but I don't think it had the same
| power as BBEdit.
| kleff wrote:
| Programmer's Notepad is amazing, its been my goto in Windows
| for well over a decade at this point. Has everything I need
| without any bloat, also work fine on large files (I often do
| regex-searches on huge log files with it).
| metalliqaz wrote:
| Back in the day it may have been UltraEdit, but these days I'm
| sure there's something else. I've been using Notepad++ because
| it's FOSS, but it is probably too quirky to be an analogue
| no_wizard wrote:
| Wait, the impression I'm getting here is BBEdit is just Rich
| Siegel now? Does Barebones not have any other engineers working
| on BBEdit?
|
| Somewhat surprising, but props to Rich, that is some impressive
| work, above what I already thought was impressive work!
| scarface_74 wrote:
| John Gruber of daringfireball fame and co-creator of Markdown
| worked there for awhile. His chapter on regex in the BBEdit
| manual is widely regarded as the best out there.
| chipotle_coyote wrote:
| I know Patrick Woolsey is still there. I don't think the
| company has ever been that big.
| favorited wrote:
| Sounds pretty bare-bones to me!
| bluedino wrote:
| Never read an article inside the App Store. That's a first.
| coolandsmartrr wrote:
| Why not?
| tslater2006 wrote:
| Guessing they meant "I have never read" and not telling you
| to "never read"
| jen729w wrote:
| I find myself writing like this all the time. I omit the
| 'I', writing it like I say it.
|
| Then I read back my own words and invariably insert the 'I'
| as I realise it doesn't make sense.
| stefncb wrote:
| In this particular instance you'd have to disambiguate
| with "I have" or "I had", I alone would mean the wrong
| thing.
| schoen wrote:
| "Read" is a particularly unlucky verb for this because its
| past participle and imperative form are written the same
| way. Most other English verbs wouldn't have this particular
| ambiguity.
|
| "Never eaten a Carolina Reaper pepper, but I'm looking
| forward to my first time."
|
| "Never eat a Carolina Reaper pepper; you'll regret it."
|
| Wiktionary has a few dozen irregular verbs that could
| produce an ambiguity like this one:
|
| https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Appendix:English_irregular_v
| e...
|
| "Never miscast Magic Missile ..."
|
| "Never shut a door on someone's finger ..."
|
| "Never preset the thermostat to 90 degF before going on
| vacation..."
|
| "Never put an irregular verb in a position where readers
| might interpret it ambiguously..."
|
| ("... but there's a first time for everything, I guess" /
| "... you won't be happy with the results")
| bandrami wrote:
| That's a participle with an elided subject and helper verb,
| not an imperative. In spoken English the difference in
| pronunciation makes it obvious.
| bandrami wrote:
| [dead]
| synicalx wrote:
| I'm not a huge fan of app stores in general, but I have to give
| Apple credit for these articles they do. Never too long, high
| quality and interesting ones like this come along semi-
| regularly especially the design-centric ones. I've actually
| found a few good apps through these over the years, partly
| because of design showcases that looked cool and partly because
| the developer seemed like a nice person and I wanted to check
| their app out.
| username1407 wrote:
| Me neither, and thanks to Apple's idiotic thought of 1 country
| = 1 language I'm not even allowed to read it my the language of
| choice. Thanks Apple!
| tsukikage wrote:
| I'm sure Apple have the utmost respect for their users, and
| the internal decisions that led to this design choice
| answered the questions "what does the customer need?" and
| "how can we help them be more productive?"
| perilunar wrote:
| Same. It's weird because the article link opens the same
| article in both the browser and in the App Store app, which
| seems redundant.
| HeckFeck wrote:
| These interviews with developers in a magazine format is
| something I'd welcome seeing more. Who doesn't like a good war
| story?
| tedunangst wrote:
| It's funny. Safari on iPhone refuses to show the normal options
| for long press. Really wants to open the store.
| justinator wrote:
| I moved to TextMate. I can't remember why. Is either of them
| better than the other these days? I feel like TextMate has been
| slightly abandoned.
| kergonath wrote:
| I still use TextMate. I don't know whether development has
| slowed or stopped, but I haven't had any issue recently. I find
| it less clunky and nicer than Sublime Text, which is my second
| choice and my escape route the day TextMate dies. It'd be a
| pain to convert all those bundles, though. TextMate's support
| for esoteric language grammars is second to none and last time
| I checked some of mine depended on features not implemented in
| Sublime Text.
| Skeime wrote:
| Yeah, TextMate was great. I think it was the very intuitive way
| in which you could quickly extend it.
|
| Find yourself typing this thing over and over? Just create a
| snippet, the interface is just very few clicks away.
|
| Need a bit more power? Turn it into a command, and use whatever
| scripting language you're comfortable with.
|
| Want to change the color scheme? Here is a nice declarative way
| to select precisely the syntax elements you want.
|
| (I think part of this was that they had a bunch of short videos
| on their site showing you how to do this, and then a well-
| written documentation to accompany it for the details.)
|
| Sadly, with TextMate 2.0, the interface for these things got
| quite a bit clunkier, and then I left. (I also discovered my
| preference for modal editing.)
| shanghaikid wrote:
| Mac: BBEdit, textmate, Win: notepad++, dreamweaver(I really like
| it) The good old days.
| thathndude wrote:
| Has Apple done other pieces like this? This is the first time
| I've read one of these, and it was quite good!
|
| I'd always heard Rich's name tossed around as a developer's
| developers, but learned a lot more about him and his thinking
| from this article.
| sbuk wrote:
| They've been doing them a while. There are pieces on the devs
| behind Things, as well as interviews with Craig Hockenberry
| (The Icon Factory), Gus Mueller (Flying Meat) and Ken Case
| (Omni Group). I'm sure I've also seen one with Cabel Sasser of
| Panic too.
| tapvt wrote:
| Editing perl in BBEdit. What a wonderful tool!
| NegativeLatency wrote:
| Forked and fixed a couple of issues with a bbedit color scheme
| for vim, enjoy! (It's my daily driver)
| https://github.com/nburns/bbedit-vim-colors
| robotmlg wrote:
| Say what you want about BBEdit no longer being useful in the
| modern era, but whenever I have to work with a multi-megabyte
| file that my IDE chokes on, BBEdit can open it no problem.
| wsc981 wrote:
| I've used BBEdit ages ago, but these days SublimeText is fine
| as well. And perhaps even better (again, not sure since I
| haven't used BBEdit for ages).
|
| From my experience SublimeText handles large files fine, but I
| never really tried to open multi-gigabyte size files.
|
| I love SublimeText, it's my favorite text editor and also
| multiplatform, so I have the same experience and tools on
| macOS, Windows & Linux.
| roydivision wrote:
| The killer feature of Sublime for me is cross platform. I am
| stuck in Windows at work, and I have a Mac at home. I don't
| need to have to think where I am each time I edit text.
| Fomite wrote:
| Nearly all the research code for my lab is written in BBEdit.
| dkarras wrote:
| yeah I never use BBEdit day to day but I have it installed in
| my drive for those times where I have to wrangle big files.
| e28eta wrote:
| Lots of love for BBEdit. I appreciate it as a long-lived, native
| Mac text editor. It hasn't stagnated, instead incrementally
| improving for decades.
|
| Discovering the command line tools was a very good day for me. I
| really like the built-in (two way) diff, and it's my $EDITOR of
| choice on mac.
| abhibeckert wrote:
| I also love BBEdit, and while it hasn't stagnated it also
| hasn't kept up either.
|
| I've moved on to VSCode which has so many more features than
| BBEdit - it's not even close.
| AlphaGeekZulu wrote:
| I started using BBedit around 1995. If I hadn't left Apple/MacOS
| for Linux about 15 years ago, I would definitely still be a
| (gladly paying) BBedit user!
| rvense wrote:
| Same story here basically, I loved BBEdit back in the pre-OS X
| era, especially after I installed Macsbug and learned how to
| dig my essays out of memory and write them to disk if anything
| crashed while I was writing...
|
| I was on a Mac constantly from 1989-2009, I'd became a bit of a
| free software zealot and moved from an iBook to a ThinkPad.
| It's funny, because a lot of people were making the opposite
| move, and as I understand it the early 2010's are looked at as
| a bit of a by-gone golden age for Apple now. Can I ask why you
| chose to move?
| im_down_w_otp wrote:
| BBEdit was an essential component of not having to deal with the
| terrible editor & even worse runtime stability of CodeWarrior for
| a spell in a past life of mine.
|
| Thank you, BBEdit.
|
| Also, you're low-key responsible for my lifelong unrealized quest
| to give my Linux workstation sane keyboard shortcuts.
| girvo wrote:
| > CodeWarrior
|
| Oh heck, you've just dredged up some absolutely horrific
| repressed memories of that pile of junk. It was _impressive_
| how unstable it was.
|
| It's funny too, these days I'm in embedded development again,
| and it's a markedly different experience to those days, though
| still amusingly unstable at times too.
| rvense wrote:
| Interesting. Do you remember which version (or approximate
| year) you're referring to?
|
| I've recently been writing my first real app for Mac OS 9,
| using C++ (MacZoop framework) and Codewarrior Pro 5 on a G4.
| There's some features I miss from my modern developer
| environment (decent version control!), but other than that
| it's been a thoroughly enjoyable experience. Certainly I've
| had no stability issues at all with the IDE.
| girvo wrote:
| 2004-2005! Couldn't tell you the version though I'm afraid.
| I had nothing but issues with it, man it frustrated me
| haha. It's possible my memory has made the experience worse
| than it actually was however
| rvense wrote:
| I've no reason to doubt your experience at all, I'm
| really just idly curious. Was that on Windows though?
| 2004-2005 I think it was all but gone from the Mac, and
| people had moved to Project Builder (later Xcode), but
| maybe you were still working on some older project.
|
| AFAIK the current CodeWarrior is based on Eclipse, if
| they're still updating it.
| girvo wrote:
| I think it was, yes, and specifically for some embedded
| toolchain that required it. It would regularly lock up,
| crash, and lose my work. Though it's quite possible the
| toolchain was at least partially the problem, and I wish
| I could remember which one it was. I might go digging
| through my old backups, I'm curious myself now
| rvense wrote:
| After Freescale bought Metrowerks (1996? '98?), there
| were versions of CodeWarrior made for many of Freescale's
| embedded chips, which were obviously very common.
|
| Again, in spite of my current experience I don't doubt
| for a second that you had a lot of issues. Software was
| just a lot worse back then, and having now dipped my toes
| in the frameworks and languages used in the circa 2000
| period, I'm not really surprised why. There's 0
| references to automated testing in any of the programming
| books or documentation I've looked at, and as far as I
| can tell absolutely no support for it. Version control is
| extremely rudimentary. I didn't programme professionally
| until early last decade, and some of what I can infer to
| be have been normal is just baffling for me.
| im_down_w_otp wrote:
| Back in the good ol' days of no memory protection on the Mac
| and the fun of trying to figure out if it was you or your dev
| environment that just unrecoverably hosed the system state.
| cat_plus_plus wrote:
| Really? I though CodeWarrior for PalmOS was a champ compared to
| Visual C++ for embedded platforms. Lets start with a fully
| functional and bug free compiler with standard library and all
| features working.
| eviks wrote:
| > FTA: "We've always had the utmost respect for the user. Every
| internal decision about look and function answers the questions
| 'What does the customer need?' and 'How can we help them be more
| productive?' (Not 'How can we give them what they're asking for?'
| because that isn't the right question to answer.)"
|
| That's not utmost respect, but condescension when you think you
| always know /can figure out better than the user
| globular-toast wrote:
| Developers who do what the users tell them to build the worst
| stuff. Imagine what a state your plumbing would be if you told
| your plumber where to put the pipes. The correct line of
| questioning is not "what do you want?" but "what is the problem
| you are having?".
| labster wrote:
| No that's just reality. If you give the user exactly what they
| asked for, you shipped a bad product.
| eviks wrote:
| No, that's just your caricature of reality. Reality depends
| entirely on the reality of what the users asked for and the
| product.
| gattilorenz wrote:
| I think you're reading this the wrong way, there's
| (literally!) decades of scientific literature about it, and
| it's not a problem of being condescending.
|
| For a gentle non-scientific introduction:
| https://www.forbes.com/sites/leoyeykelis/2018/05/10/why-
| its-...
|
| If you actually want to know more, a very accessible
| textbook: https://books.google.nl/books/about/Interaction_D
| esign.html?...
| eviks wrote:
| Could you me just a tad more specific instead of
| sciencing around? For example, I've read your article and
| its argument is simply not relevant
|
| > Good UX research, however, does not ask people what
| they want. That's because people find it difficult to put
| themselves in imaginary situations, especially in cases
| where they need to picture a future with products and
| technology that do not currently exist.
|
| But this is a text editor, gazillions of those exist,
| with various UI paradigms and features, it simply makes
| no sense to claim that all users, even those very
| experienced in alternative apps (so nothing imaginary
| about that), don't know better than BBEdit's small design
| team, thus it's ok to ignore their explicit asks because
| you know "what they really need"
|
| Like in the example cited above with removing hard
| wrapping, the quoted argument "The two states (hard wrap
| while typing) and soft wrapping have the same visual
| result and would tend to cause considerable confusion. "
| is patently false as there exist editors with very clear
| separation of the two (and those being confused can
| always disable either). But then if you think you know
| better, you keep being "utmost-respectfully" wrong for
| years
| gattilorenz wrote:
| I cannot give you a specific example in this case,
| because I don't know the feature, use case and problem...
| which is kinda the issue at hand. But the claim that
| "users are familiar with other apps, we should give them
| the exactly same features if they ask for it" is not very
| sound: first of all, not all users will be familiar with
| other editors. Those familiar might have had a very hard
| time learning them at first. And, in general, it's good
| to ask "why do you want that? Show me how you use it and
| why you think it's important, and we can test multiple
| design alternatives until we found something that works
| for you", instead of "let me add feature X from editor Y"
| (both because there would be no innovation, but also no
| reason to change editors).
|
| For the article, the relevant part was: " In general, a
| researcher will first ask a customer to walk through how
| they currently solve a particular problem. As part of
| this investigation, they will probe at the user's pain
| points and existing workarounds". What is the hard
| wrapping used for? Maybe there's a better way of solving
| the same problem to begin with, and hard wrapping is just
| a band-aid instead of the proper solution to the
| underlying goal?
|
| By the way, UX research doesn't claim that designers
| cannot get anything wrong or that users can never get
| anything's right - that's a silly simplification of
| course. But I don't think the the BBEdit author was
| trying to promote such an absolutist view.
| [deleted]
| gattilorenz wrote:
| Yes, that's UX design 101: the user doesn't know, and the
| product designer doesn't know. That's why user experience is
| hard...
| zarzavat wrote:
| In other words, you built "The Homer"
| pfych wrote:
| BBEdit was my first editor when I was learning to program for the
| web on my Power PC bubble mac. It's crazy to think it was
| considered old when I was using it and that it's still around
| now!
| steve_adams_86 wrote:
| This was my first "real" editor. I guess that was... 23 years
| ago. Wow. Writing HTML and discovering CSS, it was a window into
| a brand new world.
|
| Toggling between BBEdit and the CSS Zen Garden. Those were the
| days.
| chazeon wrote:
| I recently bout BBedit on their 30th birthday event.
|
| BBEdit / TextMate has the Mac feel that I enjoy editing long-form
| text in (recently, a lot of latex manuscripts); meanwhile, vscode
| is where I write code. I don't know what contributes to this
| difference exactly, but they occupy a different part of the
| market as of now.
| TomMasz wrote:
| I've never _not_ had BBEdit installed.
| pinebox wrote:
| Free version of TextWrangler was the sweet spot, for me. BBEdit
| is more than I need for day-to-day and seems comparatively slow.
| Not an "upgrade" I wanted.
| spacebacon wrote:
| same... fond memories of TextWrangler.
| comechao wrote:
| BBEdit is always in my Dock :)
| layer8 wrote:
| Copy that doesn't open in the app store: https://archive.ph/aDYK2
| MrResearcher wrote:
| What data structures were used to represent the content in-memory
| and edits? Was it some sort of an immutable set of chunks
| organized into a tree, similar to Word?
| aduffy wrote:
| BBEdit was my first text editor ~15 years ago! Back when I was
| really obsessive over the small stuff because I wanted to be like
| the cool kids. I then got into Text Wrangler, vim, emacs, nvim,
| etc. over the years. I was really into customizing my
| environment.
|
| Now I just use IntelliJ and VSCode. Don't really have to think
| about it, plugin system has grown enormously, and I rarely need
| to spend time futzing with my configs because excellent themes
| are free and plentiful. Progress!
| softirq wrote:
| I use vim and don't futz around with my config. I feel like
| this is a perpetual myth that vim or emacs requires endless
| tinkering. I maybe touch it once a year, and I still have:
|
| - LSP support - code actions, hover, gotos, linting.
|
| - Fuzzy finding with previews (with syntax highlighting thanks
| to bat)
|
| - Integrated Git
|
| - Integrated Terminal
|
| - Integrated Debugger
|
| It's a real shame that IntelliJ and VSCode users scare
| beginners off from trying out all the amazing editors like Vim,
| Barebones, Nova, etc. with this FUD that they won't get
| anything done. I've seen people swap between editors like SOs
| in high school and I've been able to consistently stick with
| Vim my entire career, so maybe the FOTM editor crowd are really
| not seeing the gains in productivity they believe they are
| getting by always picking the "out of the box" editor.
| extr wrote:
| In VS Code I have an extension that allows me to highlight
| code and get immediate edits/advice from GPT-4. What's the
| VIM analogue there?
| softirq wrote:
| Just doing a basic google search shows me at least 4
| plugins that interface with chat GPT. I personally don't
| use them because my workplace doesn't allow feeding our
| code to another companies backend.
| keyle wrote:
| Kind of the same here. You know they've added LSP support to
| BBEdit recently and if you wanted a native solution... Well it
| does 95% of it all.
| BooneJS wrote:
| By the time I switched to Mac it was already MacOS X Jaguar and
| it had vi which I was used to. I didn't buy my first BBEdit
| license until 2 years ago (!!) thanks to a blog post I read. It's
| a great editor. I've always liked macOS because it felt like the
| Linux I use at work, but BBEdit is a great reason to not run vim
| fullscreen.
| meerita wrote:
| 2004 was the last year I used BBEdit.
| notnotjake wrote:
| Love BBEdit for everyday text stuff. I love how lightweight, yet
| powerful it is.
| tqwhite wrote:
| I'm reading this thread and am, again, surprised by the fact of
| people changing editors willy nilly. I have customized my bbedit
| experience endlessly. I have text filters, dynamic snippets,
| script elements, 'text factory's and a zillion project files (I
| often have two or three for one project so I can open the
| configuration or the UI or the back end separately.
|
| I can't imagine choosing to give up those decades of custom
| features I've built into my workflow. Nor can I figure out how I
| would work the practicalities. I would say that it is literally
| impossible for me to change editors at this point.
|
| And, I consider this all to be a tribute to bbedit's flexibility,
| speed, and solid, hard core reliability. I love that program. If
| they offered a paid release every year, I would ante up happily.
| reaperducer wrote:
| _I 'm reading this thread and am, again, surprised by the fact
| of people changing editors willy nilly._
|
| Based on reading discussions on HN over the last decade or so,
| it seems that a lot of people on HN don't choose editors
| because it's the best tool for the job, but because of the same
| factors that affect the fashion world: Flash, style, color,
| trend, posturing, and peer pressure.
|
| I've banged out code on everything from a green-screen Wyse
| terminal to Panic's Nova, and there's nothing better for
| reducing productivity than changing and reconfiguring your
| tools in the middle of a project.
| thaumaturgy wrote:
| Ohh, BBEdit. I've long since moved on from the Mac platform, but
| I _still_ have really fond memories of it and wish more text
| editors could match it (SublimeText is pretty good too).
|
| I remember when BBEdit came out. It was revolutionary at the
| time. It was a fun challenge to find "large" files to test it on,
| and for a while nobody was sure how it did the magic it did.
|
| It shipped with a really clean UI and it gave me my introduction
| to regular expressions. Its "light" theme is still so good that I
| occasionally try to clone it into environments (unsuccessfully).
|
| When Mac development shifted from the THINK ecosystem over
| towards Metrowerks, CodeWarrior's IDE was such a pig that you'd
| figure out how to do the editing in BBEdit and the debugging and
| compiling in MWCW.
|
| BBEdit also shipped with a rare (again, at the time) ability to
| open and juggle loooooots of windows, and with a little bit of
| Applescript we'd try to open an entire directory of files just to
| see if we could make it faceplant. It almost never did.
|
| I have a huge amount of respect for Rich and having stuck to
| doing one thing and one thing well for so long. (Well, kinda.
| TextWrangler was okay, and MailSmith was pretty good but got
| sold.)
| dietrichepp wrote:
| My memory of CodeWarrior is a bit different. It didn't seem
| like a pig, but BBEdit just worked better for editing files.
| BBEdit had better search/replace, shortcuts for navigating
| text, everything was just better in BBEdit.
| [deleted]
| tnamorfd wrote:
| I've been a developer for three decades and have done a few
| things that I'd like to think are worthy of some merit - but my
| credit as one of the 'unindicted co-conspirators' in BBEdit is
| absolutely one of the things I'm most proud of!
| deltarholamda wrote:
| BareBones has had several good programs to go along with BBEdit.
|
| Yojimbo is a kind of catch-all database where you can cram stuff
| and organize it. Kind of like a Pinterest for all kinds of
| things, not just images. With the family pack, everybody can have
| access to the same lump-o-stuff.
|
| Way back in the day, they had Mailsmith, which was, more or less,
| a POP mail client with BBEdit crammed in. (This was back when
| pretty much all email was text and not HTML.) If you used email a
| lot, and needed to do clever things with it, it was fantastic. It
| never made the jump to IMAP AFAIK, so it kind of died out. I
| really liked it, but in today's world where a lot of email
| doesn't come multipart MIME, just HTML, it would be less useful.
|
| But BBEdit is just great. Much like emacs, once you get immersed
| into the ecosystem, you find leaving it difficult. You end up
| with a collection of snippets and widgets and scripts and bits
| and bobs that become your workflow. And you can script all of it
| as well. It continues to chug along with ridiculously large
| files, even back when you might work on files bigger than the
| amount of RAM in your machine.
|
| I'll remain a Mac user for as long as BBEdit works on it. While I
| can use other editors, if I have the choice I'll work in BBEdit.
| no_wizard wrote:
| I like Yojimbo on Mac, but for the life of me I can't figure
| out why their iPad app is read only still. I understood it when
| it first came out, but they added all kinds of features on the
| Mac version, such as iCloud sync, but the iPad app still only
| syncs via local network only, and it can't edit anything, and
| doesn't take advantage of things like web views.
|
| Weirdly behind feature set still
| js2 wrote:
| If you're looking for something like Yojimbo with near
| feature parity on macOS and iPadOS, take a look at DEVONThink
| Pro. I use it with a ScanSnap and ExactScan as my digital
| filing cabinet.
| kstrauser wrote:
| That's where I'm at, too.
|
| Scanning a doc into DT and then immediately shredding the
| paper is one of life's little pleasures.
| marssaxman wrote:
| > in today's world where a lot of email doesn't come multipart
| MIME, just HTML, it would be less useful
|
| I find that ignoring mail which lacks a text/plain part makes
| for a pretty decent spam filter.
| deltarholamda wrote:
| I recently emailed a guy that, if you sent him a text-only
| email (as I normally do), it would go into his spam folder or
| get vanished. I had to turn on HTML email to send something
| to him.
|
| They used some version of Outlook. Don't know if it was in-
| house or the Microsoft hosted service or what. Plus whatever
| gimcrack spam filters they might use in house. I've seen some
| nonsense on the Internet, but this was a first for me.
| Absolutely bonkers.
| marssaxman wrote:
| That is so absurd it's kind of funny!
| caycep wrote:
| I really wish they or someone would turn Yojimbo into a
| scientific papers PDF organizer/reader, or at least have some
| support for this. Papers was good but got bloated and the
| standalone is not supported anymore
| systems_glitch wrote:
| I still run it on vintage Macs. Pretty sure it was the first
| programmer's editor I used on Macintosh. A lot of the Macs in
| college (iMac G5/10.4 era) had TextMate, which I got pretty used
| to, but still ran BBEdit at home.
|
| Great program!
| tqwhite wrote:
| And I failed to mention the one aspect where bbedit exceeds every
| editor I have ever tried (a few years ago, I actually did a half
| year where I tried everything): Search and Replace.
|
| The Search and Replace feature of bbedit is absolutely the best
| ever. When I am forced to use another editor, I am appalled by
| contrast. Since I use this 1000 times a day, I will never change.
| bbedit forever!
| masswerk wrote:
| I'm an ardent user of BBEdit since 1996, and it's the single
| solid piece of software, I've seen in all these years.
| vlowther wrote:
| BBEdit is my weapon of choice for reading massive log dumps and
| database dumps for support at $DAYJOB. It does not seem to ever
| choke no matter how many hundreds of megabytes if text I need to
| plow through.
| abhibeckert wrote:
| BBEdit was known for that in the past, but it's a weak point
| these days. It definitely has an upper limit on filesizes and
| will "choke" on large files (probably only slightly larger than
| the log files you're using it for).
|
| Other apps are much better at large files. The APFS filesystem
| has a maximum file size of 8 Exabytes and plenty of other text
| editors can handle file sizes that large without any issues.
| 404mm wrote:
| That and random snippets of text that live as unsaved documents
| for days to months.
|
| BBEdit is a big misfit for me and how I use editors. It's great
| at transforming text and zillion of other features but I get my
| work done in VSCode or PyCharm. My true preference was Atom.
| RIP
|
| Even with this all, I still install BBEdit on every device I
| can.
| criddell wrote:
| > We've always had the utmost respect for the user. Every
| internal decision about look and function answers the auestions
| "What does the customer need?" and "How can we help them be more
| productive?" (Not "How can we give them what they're asking for?"
| because that isn't the right question to answer.)
|
| That's hard to do and I would guess that their ability to
| distinguish between what users ask for and what they need is a
| big part of the software's longevity.
| selcuka wrote:
| > That's hard to do and I would guess that their ability to
| distinguish between what users ask for and what they need is a
| big part of the software's longevity.
|
| True, but it's also necessary. As Henry Ford (supposedly)
| famously said "If I had asked people what they wanted, they
| would have said faster horses."
| veidr wrote:
| That's usually the (supposed) quote that is brought up when
| somebody questions this "don't give the user what they want,
| figure out what they need" notion.
|
| And it sounds great, and makes you laugh the first time you
| hear it (but yawn the next 9,999 times...)
|
| But think it through: how many customers _really_ would have
| actually said that?
|
| Wow, you guessed correctly! It was indeed, four guys, out of
| all the customers Ford had. If he had asked them, which he
| said he didn't.
|
| But how many of those four would have really said that if
| they didn't happen to be drunk?
|
| Wow, correct again! Indeed, zero.
|
| So in fact this whole pithy little quote -- regardless of
| whether he said it or not -- is just shorthand for HAW HAW
| USERS DUM AS SHIT BRO LMAO
| teo_zero wrote:
| I've always thought this anecdote about Henry Ford is
| misleading, if not utterly false. In most cases giving people
| what you think is best for them and not what they ask for,
| results in a completely failure. Only a small percentage of
| cases actually leads to a groundbreaking new technology. But
| our memory is biased: we only tell success stories and forget
| the failures...
| [deleted]
| modriano wrote:
| The Henry Ford quote is based on the premise that most
| people lack the technical knowledge and problem
| understanding needed to develop visionary solutions, and
| would just try to give you what they think is best for you
| (a faster horse, a cleaner car, a fancy new dependency,
| etc).
| TeMPOraL wrote:
| The Henry Ford quote is both dumb and extremely
| misapplied. It basically tells you that a successful,
| category-defining mass market product, does not look like
| what you'd get if you _imagined_ asking a bunch of
| friends a quick question and took their imagined ad-hoc
| answers at face value.
|
| I say imagined, because any _actual_ horse owner would
| tell Ford they don 't want a faster horse - they want a
| horse that's stronger, eats less, and _shits less_ , as
| those were the real constraints of the horse platform[0].
|
| (There's also a healthy dose of condescension in assuming
| "most people lack the (...) problem understanding". This
| _may_ be true when you 're thinking up a new class of a
| mass-market product. It's definitely not true when you're
| playing with some specialized product people already use
| productively.)
|
| Also note the context here is _pushing_ a new product
| category on the mass market. It 's not about making an
| incremental improvement to existing product category, nor
| making an incremental improvement to existing product -
| two scenarios which most companies operate in, and in
| which this quote is most misapplied. In those scenarios,
| your users - again, note, not _prospective clients_ , but
| _existing users_ - most likely know the problem space
| _way_ better than you do. They may have problems
| communicating the details of their feedback, so you need
| to actually _try_ and understand what they 're saying.
| Talk to them. Have them show you how they work.
|
| --
|
| [0] - Strength translates to work/carrying capacity,
| eating less would give exponential savings on logistics
| to large horse operators, such as militaries, and as for
| the last part... suffice it to say that in Ford's times,
| horse manure was a bigger and more immediate health
| problem than air pollution is today.
| NikkiA wrote:
| It's also a puzzling anecdote, since Ford did not
| _invent_ the motor car, it already existed when he
| started making his cars. And his early cars were slower
| than horses or horse-and-carriages of the time.
| zimzam wrote:
| I've had non-technical users, who used the application
| daily, ask me to implement a large form where every input
| was a radio button.
|
| When I suggested using a more appropriate mix of drop-
| downs, checkboxes and radio buttons they readily
| accepted.
|
| It turns out they thought radio buttons would be easier
| for me to implement. They aren't stupid people, they just
| don't have any idea of how things work outside their
| domain.
| kevincox wrote:
| If anything the anecdote should be about identifying what
| users actually want. They didn't really want a faster
| horse, they wanted a way to get around faster. They
| couldn't envision a different way so they embedded the
| "faster horse" solution in their response. However Henry
| Ford correctly identifies the core problem and gave them
| that.
| sleepybrett wrote:
| I pretty much stopped using bbedit when moving over to osx from
| system9. It had the ability to run emacs (there were some emacs
| ports for pre osx mac, but they all annoyed me in one way or
| another) and that was a nice return 'home' for me. I remember
| having to work on a project on a windows machine in the early
| aughts that drove me nut until someone handed me notepad++ and
| called it 'bbedit for windows'.
|
| That all said, nice of apple to write a little puff piece about
| it and it's author. BBedit was a workhorse for many and continues
| to be for many. It's one of the few very successful mac apps that
| apple didn't just steal (like watson).
| tiffanyh wrote:
| UltraEdit
|
| I never understood why there was so much love for BBEdit on Mac
| and so little love for UltraEdit on Windows.
|
| They were both released around the same time, selling to the same
| audience just on different platforms.
|
| This was also during a time where there was many options.
| leokennis wrote:
| I'm a Mac user, but for my job I have a company Windows laptop.
| It used to come with UE and I absolutely loved it. I work with
| large XML files (think 500 MB) a lot and UE would
| open/format/xpath/regex/etc. them with 0 issue.
|
| Then upper management forgot they employed engineers and did
| not renew the license.
|
| Now I'm stuck with VS Code which chokes when I open a 20 MB
| file.
| globular-toast wrote:
| UltraEdit has "true" support for large files meaning it
| doesn't have to load the whole thing into memory like most
| other editors (including BBEdit).
| aeyes wrote:
| I guess Mac users are more easily impressed because there is
| (was) less choice and UltraEdit(32) wasn't around on the
| platform at the time.
|
| It's still my editor of choice but it's a shame that they
| switched to a subscription model.
| shusaku wrote:
| Much like iOS seems to drive app sales better than android, in
| the old days Macs had the best shareware
| sigzero wrote:
| UltraEdit is on the Mac now. It's not as polished as the
| Windows version but it is good and you get UltraCompare with it
| as well.
| [deleted]
| miles wrote:
| FTA: "We've always had the utmost respect for the user. Every
| internal decision about look and function answers the questions
| 'What does the customer need?' and 'How can we help them be more
| productive?' (Not 'How can we give them what they're asking for?'
| because that isn't the right question to answer.)"
|
| I experienced this first hand when asking Rich to restore the
| "hard wrap to window width" feature in TextWrangler[1] (it had
| also been removed from BBEdit).
|
| He quickly and kindly replied that while "We don't have any plans
| to restore the 'Window Width' option for hard wrapping" I could
| "describe how this would be useful to you" for him to "give it
| some thought".
|
| I simply downgraded to restore the desired functionality, as I
| did not want to waste the author's time arguing over the utility
| of a feature that had been included for ages.
|
| Since then, I've purchased BBEdit licenses, but use other editors
| when I need to hard wrap text to window width.
|
| [1]
| https://tinyapps.org/blog/201807150700_hard_wrap_window_widt...
| justinator wrote:
| I remember arguing for tabs, and he was like, "LOL I don't
| think so". So how'd that turn out?
| Asooka wrote:
| Hah. VIM has had both soft and hard wrapping since forever and
| they're visually distinguished by the line numbers and line
| continuation marks in the gutter. I find it extremely useful,
| as I don't want to write overlong lines for commits &c, but do
| want to soft-wrap existing long lines where they are found.
| veidr wrote:
| > (Not 'How can we give them what they're asking for?' because
| that isn't the right question to answer.)
|
| We say some very similar variant of this where I currently
| work, and also at previous places. Personally, I've never been
| able to understand this in any other way than:
|
| a.) our users are idiots, we developers know much better then
| those poor souls
|
| b.) our users are idiots, adding a feature without taking away
| a marginally-similar feature would be so confusing for them,
| poor souls
|
| And I think it's why BBEdit gets this historical puff piece
| that reads like an in-flight magazine piece congratulating
| Madonna on still being able to dance at this late stage of her
| career.
|
| I used BBEdit 1.0, and probably every version after that --
| including the OpenDoc component[1] version!! -- but I finally
| stopped paying for it after version 13, after realizing I only
| ever used it for dealing with my Japanese bank's legacy-
| encoding CSV files. (Which I still do, to be fair, but the free
| version works for this.)
|
| I don't think BBEdit has maintained legitimate relevance, in
| terms of writing most kinds of code, or even more complex text-
| processing workflows (for which it is better-suited relative to
| coding), and IMHO that's basically because of this attitude of
| "our users are dumb! we must protect them, poor little lambs!"
|
| For instance, despite having had rectangular selection quite
| early, when it was rare (20 years ago? memories get hazy...), I
| don't think they ever made the jump to Sublime-style multiple
| cursors and discontiguous selections/insertion-points (later
| made 9 quintillion times more popular by VS Code) -- arguably
| the most significant advance in text editors since the
| introduction of multiple windows.
|
| Likewise language servers and basically everything since 2013
| or so.
|
| I might be wrong, though; I look at text editors from the
| writer-of-software perspective, mainly. TFA references people
| using BBEdit to write English, and as that endeavor has gotten
| more complicated ("just write it in Markdown" somebody once
| said to my father, and he threw a spiny squash at their head)
| maybe BBEdit's niche has shifted. I don't think it is relevant
| today as a source code editor, but maybe as a blog post editor,
| or applied statistics prompt editor, etc?
|
| [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OpenDoc
| ferbivore wrote:
| Was this intended to be a positive anecdote? It doesn't sound
| like one - how is removing a feature users care about and
| refusing to add it back any evidence of "utmost respect for the
| user"?
| wjnc wrote:
| I read this as a positive. Practicing what you preach. Rich
| asked for a further introduction into the needs behind the
| users request. The user decided not to pursue that further.
| Perhaps the feature could have been re-introduced if the
| client had a very clear user story. We won't know. Is it fair
| to ask users for stories when you introduce UI/UX
| regressions. That's debatable. But Rick showed real interest
| consistent with expectations.
| nickm12 wrote:
| Heh. I just looked up an exchange I had with Bare Bones support
| from 2001 (!) about the hard-wrap-as-you-type feature. This was
| an early BBE feature that was removed when they added soft
| wrapping.
|
| I tried to argue for this feature but was politely refused. The
| argument was: "It is not so much that the code can not co-exist
| as that the combination of user experiences causes confusion.
| The two states (hard wrap while typing) and soft wrapping have
| the same visual result and would tend to cause considerable
| confusion. Because of this we removed the first when we added
| the second."
|
| It's 22 years later and the feature has not been restored. I
| wonder how many times its been refused.
| copperx wrote:
| The reason I fell in love with Emacs decades ago was because
| how it could do both kinds of wrapping so easily.
| rvense wrote:
| I wish my company would adopt this philosophy. We seem to just
| add features when people ask for them, and it really starts to
| show after a while.
| alwillis wrote:
| > Since then, I've purchased BBEdit licenses, but use other
| editors when I need to hard wrap text to window width.
|
| BBEdit is incredibly scriptable and extensible. You could have
| written a short script in AppleScript, Perl, Ruby, Python, etc.
| to perform this task without leaving BBEdit.
| miles wrote:
| Thank you for the tip. I'm in and out of several text editors
| during the day, but only use BBEdit once or twice a month
| (usually for multi-file search and replace via regex).
|
| EDIT: According to GPT-4, "BBEdit's current scripting model
| doesn't provide a way to directly access the current window
| width, and this type of functionality is not typically
| available in most text editors' scripting APIs." If anyone
| knows a workaround, please share it here.
| sebzim4500 wrote:
| Turns out that the strategy of saying something false in
| order to get the right answer works even better when the
| false statement comes from an LLM. I guess I'll keep that
| in mind.
| ptx wrote:
| Please also keep in mind that if the corrections fail to
| materialize, posting false information will have polluted
| the knowledge pool for no benefit.
| masswerk wrote:
| BTW, BBEdit has a `hard wrap` scripting command with a
| limit option (page guide, window width, character width).
|
| And, no, GPT is not a tool for factual verification, it
| creates probable chains of words that are likely to be
| found impressive by humans.
| tantalor wrote:
| Okay let's just take GPT's word for it.
| miles wrote:
| Apologies all. Thank you for the information.
| mistersquid wrote:
| > only use BBEdit once or twice a month (usually for multi-
| file search and replace via regex).
|
| BBEdit's regular expression support is jaw-dropping.
| Combined with how quickly it can update north of 10,000
| files has kept me using BBedit for over 25 (!) years.
|
| And I'm looking forward the next quarter century.
| edgyquant wrote:
| I can't believe this has to be said here of all places.
| GPT-4 is not a search engine of factual knowledge. You can
| not assume anything it says is true and not just a made up
| grouping of words that look nice together.
| neurobashing wrote:
| According to Script Debugger, hardly the massive powerhouse
| that may end humanity like GPT-4, it's the "bounds"
| property of a window, specifically the 3rd element.
| [deleted]
| veidr wrote:
| In pixels, yes, but that's not trivial to convert to
| character width...
| phanimahesh wrote:
| I'm somehat worried about the incidental harm caused by
| people relying on GPT's word chain hallucinations as facts
| for something critical.
|
| Most laypersons don't understand that GPT is not a factual
| search engine. I'm increasingly seeing people who should
| know better also forget this now and then.
| copperx wrote:
| It is also important to note that GPT is _not_ useless as
| a search engine.
| bryanrasmussen wrote:
| the problem is that the quality of data on the web is
| such you can't really trust what you get from google
| either, so you need to go back to the pre-google days of
| using specialized search engines, or accept that some of
| what you get back is likely polluted and you don't have
| the resources to verify everything.
| j16sdiz wrote:
| with google, at least you could know where and who that
| piece of information is written..
|
| with gpt, you got nothing but the same convincing tone.
| abraae wrote:
| Nail on the head.
|
| The web is a swamp of hot garbage, in large part thanks
| to Google SEO incentives.
|
| If Google hadn't poisoned the well, and if searching
| pulled up good content instead of ads designed to look
| like search results, and search results that link to web
| pages that take 5 screenfuls to convey one sentence of
| information, they wouldn't be looking down the barrel at
| an existential threat.
| akasakahakada wrote:
| LOL kind of the same story as mind.
|
| 1. I want to change the highlight colour. It is too dim to
| recognize.
|
| People in the forum asked: hey I don't want hidden settings.
| Can you make the highlight colour adjustable?
|
| A: No. We won't do it. [1]
|
| [1] : https://groups.google.com/g/bbedit/c/yz_StJa9HVA
|
| 2. I forgot if it is the print function or what, it just don't
| have despite in the year of 2022. Oh wait maybe that is the
| function "export to pdf".
|
| People in the forum asked: Where can I do that thing?
|
| A: We don't know either. Go find other editor if you want it.
| pr0zac wrote:
| If it's export to pdf I'd think simply being on Mac solves
| that assuming it has print functionality. Is the issue the
| print functionality in MacOS can't handle files as big as
| BBEdit can making using that sometimes impossible?
|
| Or maybe it is actually a lack of print functionality and
| you're remembering export to pdf cause it came up in that
| conversation?
|
| I would test myself but I don't have the app installed right
| now.
| kemayo wrote:
| It does indeed have working print functionality. As you
| say, it's on macOS and so this automatically means it has
| PDF export.
|
| I'll admit I've never used said print functionality, so I
| can't rule out that it's missing something that some people
| consider important.
| vr46 wrote:
| I have fond memories of writing HTML with it, and various other
| things, but I almost never use it anymore. The regex playground
| is awesome but I never think to use it, even though I still keep
| a licensed copy around.
|
| I use Neovim a lot more and then perhaps VSCode, as I live in a
| world with a lot more going on and a lot more integration with
| other tools, a very different world to that which makes BBEdit a
| go-to app. Also, I don't think it's that impressive with large
| files. Still, gotta respect a hit.
|
| Power to Rich Siegel.
| arthurofbabylon wrote:
| This is great editorial coverage by the App Store team. I've long
| thought Apple to be discarding a great opportunity with marginal
| curation and storytelling regarding great apps, niche or
| otherwise, so this is encouraging to see. I hope we see more like
| this BBEdit story.
| iampivot wrote:
| An inline search pane would be nice. Not because it's necessarily
| better, but it aligns with a lot of other tools that we use.
| Y-bar wrote:
| v11 and v12 had that, did they remove it?
| dchest wrote:
| Ctrl+S for inline (as opposed to Cmd+F for dialog)
| iampivot wrote:
| Thx!
| ChrisMarshallNY wrote:
| That must be a few years old.
|
| It's been more than 30 years, since BBEdit was released.
|
| I use it a lot.
|
| I never warmed to any of the alternatives.
| keyle wrote:
| I remember Coda was good when it first came out! ... and then,
| well, that went sideways.
|
| It really takes an exceptional product to last eons and remain
| relevant.
|
| BBEdit feels more like a product of love than oriented for-
| profit.
| tqwhite wrote:
| A few years ago I noticed that all the other editors seemed
| to have online enthusiasm. Having used bbedit for decades and
| having exchanged email as tech support many, many times, I
| asked Rich if bbedit was a thriving or if it was just hanging
| on. He assured me that thriving was the better
| characterization.
|
| I would interpret that to say for-profit is applicable
| though, having had projects that lasted a long time (not
| thirty years!), I can say that sticking with it that long is
| always, also, a labor of love.
| jmaker wrote:
| Oh wow he's taking care of a gray parrot, how sweet. The guys are
| incredibly smart btw
| Cockbrand wrote:
| <3 BBEdit - it's become a bit outdated in terms of UI/UX and
| features, but it's still my daily driver for anything plain text.
| Its Regex search & replace still rules over a lot of other GUI
| editors. I've pretty much upgraded to each new version since my
| first boxed copy about 25 years ago. Back then BBEdit was quite
| the powerhouse for HTML development, and it helped me finish a
| lot of projects.
|
| Very happy to see Apple paying recognition!
| alwillis wrote:
| I haven't used BBEdit regularly since I discovered Vim (and now
| Neovim) 10+ years ago, allowing my license to lapse. But I
| couldn't resist the 30th anniversary sale to purchase the latest
| version for $30.
|
| The UI hasn't changed much, which is both good and not so good.
|
| Neovim will continue to be my daily driver but I'm glad to
| support a small, local (to where I live) developer who's been
| making great Mac software for a long time.
|
| BBEdit is like an insurance policy just in case...
| sethd wrote:
| > BBEdit is like an insurance policy just in case...
|
| I'm curious to understand how proprietary software can act as
| an insurance policy against open source software. I can
| understand how the reverse would be true.
| galleywest200 wrote:
| It think OP means insurance in that they know how to use it
| well and can "fall back" to it if their current choice fails
| to meet their needs. I do not think they meant insurance as
| in failsafe/archival purposes/the company shutting down.
| alwillis wrote:
| > It think OP means insurance in that they know how to use
| it well and can "fall back" to it if their current choice
| fails to meet their needs.
|
| This is exactly what I meant.
| deltarholamda wrote:
| I think he means insurance in the sense that if he wants to
| use it (for whatever reason) it's there.
|
| But BBEdit, while proprietary software, doesn't make
| proprietary files. They're just text files. So if BareBones
| went insane and turned BBEdit into a front-end for TikTok,
| your files will still just be text files. Even BBEdit's
| "Project" file is just a text file.
| scelerat wrote:
| To this day I still use BBEdit even though most of my daily meat-
| and-potatoes text editing and development is done in neovim. For
| some things it's just really nice features and UI, in particular:
| - the multi-file search and replace, - the diff tool,
| - shell worksheets
|
| and so much else.
|
| BBEdit has always been a fundamentally fast and reliable text
| multi-tool and I've used it since 1994 when I first started
| poking around HTML and learning Perl.
| ggm wrote:
| I never used it, but I certainly had to support web devs who did,
| and who needed me to open up FTP to the website so they could
| integrated-upload their markup.
|
| There were a bunch of "does it do PASV" conversations. Because,
| FTP is sufficiently old-school (like telnet) that it believed in
| archaisms of how to open a distinct data port to a command port,
| and it made firewalls very unhappy unless you could use "passive
| mode" which was firewall friendly.
|
| We wrote our own CMS using DAV (in Apache), and I wrote a push-
| publish engine which was on the "inside" master and would push
| out via rsync a checked out state respecting symlinks. It was
| kind-of like "stow" but for the networked web from a repo.
|
| the BBEdit users weren't happy, they had their own idea of a CVS
| tree using "tortoiseCVS", we had many fine arguments about how to
| do it (most of the web was theirs but a small portion was not,
| and was in fact Apache::Perl rendered which was in a code repo,
| and combining multiple sources of authority over web state is
| always a very confusing place to be)
| BlackFingolfin wrote:
| I think you may be mixing up some memories? tortoiseCVS was
| (is?) a Windows product and has nothing to do with BBEdit
| (which only runs on MacOS). I don't recall BBEdit ever imposing
| restrictions on CVS repositories (and I used it extensively
| with those for a decade, though only since about 1999).
|
| I am also confused by what point you are trying to make
| regarding FTP? "Web devs wanted to upload files via FTP" sounds
| pretty normal for a website 15-20 years ago? Of course it also
| unclear when your story takes place...
| ggm wrote:
| From memory, our webdevs used a mixture of mac and windows.
| They had a private CVS repo, Some of them were using Tortoise
| and editing on windows, and others used BBEdit. (I thought
| there was a cvs client GUI on Mac too but I guess not)
|
| BBEdit integrated some publish/checkin features as I
| understood it but you had to have enough CVS fu to manage
| some of it "outside" the tool.
|
| (and, what I read suggests CVS was something you had to
| actually install on the MacOS of that day, from some repo or
| another, probably whatever proceeded XCode. the developer
| tool bundle?)
|
| It was entirely normal to do FTP 15-20 years ago. The problem
| was, that FTP was bifurcated into two forms. "traditional"
| FTP with two channels one of which was a back call to the
| client and PASV mode which was the one which worked through
| firewalls better, where the server set up a path for the
| client to call into.
|
| Maybe you never had these issues. I know a lot of people at
| the time (like me) fought with FTP services and connecting
| clients who couldn't enable PASV, or didn't know how to turn
| it on, or whose firewall admin wasn't up to speed with
| enabling things to make FTP work.
|
| I forgot to note that the permission set needed to make XHTML
| and like functions work meant setting the execute bit on some
| uploaded content, sometimes. It wasn't adequate to just mark
| a file as .xhtml always, for things like SSI to work let
| alone CGI scripts. You can do that in FTP if you can issue
| the commands, or you can ask FTP to preserve state for you,
| but again from hazy memory CVS didn't always like chmod state
| of files checking things in and out.
|
| My story takes place around 1999/2002-3. If I mis remember
| forgive me. I had already been working 17 years online by the
| late 90s, and this BBEdit stuff is now 20 years ago for me. I
| forget more than I remember.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2023-06-13 23:03 UTC)