TextEdit argh

In article <none-4C59ED.10570806112007 DeleteThis @news.easynews.com>, Confused
<none DeleteThis @none.com> wrote:

> Why is it that whenever I open a saved TextEdit document, the window
> does not hug the top left corner under the Apple logo? The window opens
> too low and too far to the right and I always have to move it back up to
> see the whole document. It's almost as if the application thinks I have
> a larger monitor (I have a Macbook). Is there a preference that can fix
> this?

Each window opens a bit further right and downward than the previous
one. So if you have several windows open, they do not exactly
coincide. Plus, TextEdit remembers the last spot used, and continues
from there the next time you run it. When it reaches the bottom of the
screen, it starts over at the top. When it reaches the right, it
starts over on the left.
 >> Stay informed about: TextEdit argh 

In article <siegman-7AEE78.08105606112007 DeleteThis @nntp.stanford.edu>,
AES <siegman DeleteThis @stanford.edu> wrote:

> In article <none-4C59ED.10570806112007 DeleteThis @news.easynews.com>,
> Confused <none DeleteThis @none.com> wrote:
>
> > Why is it that whenever I open a saved TextEdit document, the window
> > does not hug the top left corner under the Apple logo? The window opens
> > too low and too far to the right and I always have to move it back up to
> > see the whole document. It's almost as if the application thinks I have
> > a larger monitor (I have a Macbook). Is there a preference that can fix
> > this?
>
> Ditto here -- and a whole litany of additional gripes.
>
> The real question is: Given that TextEdit plays such a fundamental role
> and provides such important and widely needed functions on the Mac, how
> can it be _so_ lousy, compared to any other widely used piece of Apple
> software?

Just get TextWrangler (free) and forget about it.

Isaac
 >> Stay informed about: TextEdit argh 

This message is not archived
 >> Stay informed about: TextEdit argh 

In article <siegman-7AEE78.08105606112007.DeleteThis@nntp.stanford.edu>,
AES <siegman.DeleteThis@stanford.edu> wrote:

> In article <none-4C59ED.10570806112007.DeleteThis@news.easynews.com>,
> Confused <none.DeleteThis@none.com> wrote:
>
> > Why is it that whenever I open a saved TextEdit document, the window
> > does not hug the top left corner under the Apple logo? The window opens
> > too low and too far to the right and I always have to move it back up to
> > see the whole document. It's almost as if the application thinks I have
> > a larger monitor (I have a Macbook). Is there a preference that can fix
> > this?
>
> Ditto here -- and a whole litany of additional gripes.
>
> The real question is: Given that TextEdit plays such a fundamental role
> and provides such important and widely needed functions on the Mac, how
> can it be _so_ lousy, compared to any other widely used piece of Apple
> software?

I virtually never use it. What fundamental role does it play?
 >> Stay informed about: TextEdit argh 

In article <uce-6CE831.14043006112007.TakeThisOut@comcast.dca.giganews.com>,
Gregory Weston <uce.TakeThisOut@splook.com> wrote:

> > The real question is: Given that TextEdit plays such a fundamental role
> > and provides such important and widely needed functions on the Mac, how
> > can it be _so_ lousy, compared to any other widely used piece of Apple
> > software?
>
> I virtually never use it. What fundamental role does it play?

Well,

* It comes free (I believe) on every Mac system.

* It's a reasonably small (9 MB), fast-opening app.

* It's provides somewhat limited but reasonably good plain text (.txt)
editing capabilities (but no sort capability, for example).

* It has reasonable interface with other Mac apps and utilities (like
Apple's cmd-T Font utility and Text to Speech capabilities).

* It can also immediately or automatically shift to be a Rich Text
Format editor, with a reasonable complete set of formatting and
named-style capabilities, inserted images (RTFD), and so on.

* But beyond this, it can also be set to be the app that opens not only
..rtf docs, but double-clicked Word.doc docs, letting you cut free from
Word entirely; and it can save edited docs in HTML, RTF, Word and Word
XML formats.

In other words, for many users it could serve as your basic plain text
editor _and_ your routine, everyday modest-level word processor and Word
alternative -- if only Apple would put a little more effort into making
it, maybe not "insanely great", but at least adequately competent (and
adequately documented).
 >> Stay informed about: TextEdit argh 

In article <siegman-FAF61A.12215106112007 RemoveThis @nntp.stanford.edu>,
AES <siegman RemoveThis @stanford.edu> wrote:

> In article <uce-6CE831.14043006112007 RemoveThis @comcast.dca.giganews.com>,
> Gregory Weston <uce RemoveThis @splook.com> wrote:
>
> > > The real question is: Given that TextEdit plays such a fundamental role
> > > and provides such important and widely needed functions on the Mac, how
> > > can it be _so_ lousy, compared to any other widely used piece of Apple
> > > software?
> >
> > I virtually never use it. What fundamental role does it play?
>
> Well,
>
> * It comes free (I believe) on every Mac system.
>
> * It's a reasonably small (9 MB), fast-opening app.
>
> * It's provides somewhat limited but reasonably good plain text (.txt)
> editing capabilities (but no sort capability, for example).
>
> * It has reasonable interface with other Mac apps and utilities (like
> Apple's cmd-T Font utility and Text to Speech capabilities).
>
> * It can also immediately or automatically shift to be a Rich Text
> Format editor, with a reasonable complete set of formatting and
> named-style capabilities, inserted images (RTFD), and so on.
>
> * But beyond this, it can also be set to be the app that opens not only
> .rtf docs, but double-clicked Word.doc docs, letting you cut free from
> Word entirely; and it can save edited docs in HTML, RTF, Word and Word
> XML formats.
>
> In other words, for many users it could serve as your basic plain text
> editor _and_ your routine, everyday modest-level word processor and Word
> alternative -- if only Apple would put a little more effort into making
> it, maybe not "insanely great", but at least adequately competent (and
> adequately documented).

Response 1: You've used a definition of the word fundamental with which
I was not previously familiar.

Response 2: It only lets you "cut free from Word entirely" if the
demands that you and those with whom you exchange documents don't really
use too much of Word's capabilities and don't require reproducible
rendering/printing.

Response 3: TextEdit already _does_ serve as the basic plain text editor
and routine, everyday modest-level word processor for many Mac users.

Response 4: It's very debatable whether it would be appropriate for
Apple to distribute as part of the OS a true full-service word
processor. Apple has always walked, and sometimes stepped over, a very
narrow line in the simultaneously important relationships with their
users and third-party developers.
 >> Stay informed about: TextEdit argh 

In article <uce-8694FD.17110306112007 RemoveThis @comcast.dca.giganews.com>,
Gregory Weston <uce RemoveThis @splook.com> wrote:

CLOSE-OUT RESPONSES TO THE FOLLOWING:

> Response 1: You've used a definition of the word fundamental with which
> I was not previously familiar.

OK . . .


> Response 2: It only lets you "cut free from Word entirely" if the
> demands that you and those with whom you exchange documents don't really
> use too much of Word's capabilities and don't require reproducible
> rendering/printing.

a) I'm fortunate in that, at this stage in my life, those with whom I
exchange documents are usually trying to get me to do something or
perform some volunteer service for them -- and as of 01/01/08 I don't
propose to ever process a .doc, .xls, or .ppt document again. It'll be
plain text, .rtf or PDF, please.

b) Based on my own substantial experience, the concept of "reproducible
[cross-platform] rendering/printing" of Word documents is not one that
I'm aware of as having much reality.


> Response 3: TextEdit already _does_ serve as the basic plain text editor
> and routine, everyday modest-level word processor for many Mac users.

Yes -- which is why I haven't (until now) understood why Apple has kept
it so poorly programmed (and documented).


> Response 4: It's very debatable whether it would be appropriate for
> Apple to distribute as part of the OS a true full-service word
> processor. Apple has always walked, and sometimes stepped over, a very
> narrow line in the simultaneously important relationships with their
> users and third-party developers.

Ah -- you're proposing that Apple _deliberately_ makes it mediocre --
and that could in fact just be the explanation.

--over and out.
 >> Stay informed about: TextEdit argh 

In article <siegman-CC9BAC.15105806112007.RemoveThis@nntp.stanford.edu>,
AES <siegman.RemoveThis@stanford.edu> wrote:

> In article <uce-8694FD.17110306112007.RemoveThis@comcast.dca.giganews.com>,
> Gregory Weston <uce.RemoveThis@splook.com> wrote:
>
> CLOSE-OUT RESPONSES TO THE FOLLOWING:
>
> > Response 1: You've used a definition of the word fundamental with which
> > I was not previously familiar.
>
> OK . . .

Also, not one that matches any dictionary I have at hand.

> > Response 2: It only lets you "cut free from Word entirely" if the
> > demands that you and those with whom you exchange documents don't really
> > use too much of Word's capabilities and don't require reproducible
> > rendering/printing.
>
> ...
>
> b) Based on my own substantial experience, the concept of "reproducible
> [cross-platform] rendering/printing" of Word documents is not one that
> I'm aware of as having much reality.

In realistic terms, it even breaks across versions of Word on a single
platform. Nevertheless, the closest you're going to get today is Word.
TextEdit doesn't even come close. TextEdit isn't reliably consistent
from one launch to the next.

> > Response 3: TextEdit already _does_ serve as the basic plain text editor
> > and routine, everyday modest-level word processor for many Mac users.
>
> Yes -- which is why I haven't (until now) understood why Apple has kept
> it so poorly programmed (and documented).
>
>
> > Response 4: It's very debatable whether it would be appropriate for
> > Apple to distribute as part of the OS a true full-service word
> > processor. Apple has always walked, and sometimes stepped over, a very
> > narrow line in the simultaneously important relationships with their
> > users and third-party developers.
>
> Ah -- you're proposing that Apple _deliberately_ makes it mediocre --
> and that could in fact just be the explanation.
>
> --over and out.

Actually, I'm proposing that Apple makes it "good enough" and the truth
of that is evidenced by response 3 - many people _do_ seem to find it
good enough. It is a very lightweight text editor that happens to
provide adequate mainstream support for couple of common attributed text
formats. The interesting thing about a subjective label like mediocre is
that it presupposes agreement on what the goal is. It's a decent text
editor. It's not a word processor, so labeling it a mediocre word
processor is meaningless.
 >> Stay informed about: TextEdit argh 

In article <siegman-7AEE78.08105606112007 DeleteThis @nntp.stanford.edu>,
AES <siegman DeleteThis @stanford.edu> wrote:

> In article <none-4C59ED.10570806112007 DeleteThis @news.easynews.com>,
> Confused <none DeleteThis @none.com> wrote:
>
> > Why is it that whenever I open a saved TextEdit document, the window
> > does not hug the top left corner under the Apple logo? The window opens
> > too low and too far to the right and I always have to move it back up to
> > see the whole document. It's almost as if the application thinks I have
> > a larger monitor (I have a Macbook). Is there a preference that can fix
> > this?
>
> Ditto here -- and a whole litany of additional gripes.
>
> The real question is: Given that TextEdit plays such a fundamental role
> and provides such important and widely needed functions on the Mac, how
> can it be _so_ lousy, compared to any other widely used piece of Apple
> software?

It seems to me that the obvious limitations of TextEdit mostly occur as
a result of its early task as a sample application specifically
demonstrating OS X text handling and typography facilities. I get the
impression that the Apple developer expected other developers to extend
TextEdit into other more specialised areas. After all, why else include
it in the developers install as an open source example in OS X?

--
http://www.ericlindsay.com
 >> Stay informed about: TextEdit argh 

In article
<NOwebmasterSPAM-FCD0E6.19322113112007.DeleteThis@freenews.iinet.net.au>,
Eric Lindsay <NOwebmasterSPAM.DeleteThis@ericlindsay.com> wrote:

> In article <siegman-7AEE78.08105606112007.DeleteThis@nntp.stanford.edu>,
> AES <siegman.DeleteThis@stanford.edu> wrote:
>
> > In article <none-4C59ED.10570806112007.DeleteThis@news.easynews.com>,
> > Confused <none.DeleteThis@none.com> wrote:
> >
> > > Why is it that whenever I open a saved TextEdit document, the window
> > > does not hug the top left corner under the Apple logo? The window opens
> > > too low and too far to the right and I always have to move it back up to
> > > see the whole document. It's almost as if the application thinks I have
> > > a larger monitor (I have a Macbook). Is there a preference that can fix
> > > this?
> >
> > Ditto here -- and a whole litany of additional gripes.
> >
> > The real question is: Given that TextEdit plays such a fundamental role
> > and provides such important and widely needed functions on the Mac, how
> > can it be _so_ lousy, compared to any other widely used piece of Apple
> > software?
>
> It seems to me that the obvious limitations of TextEdit mostly occur as
> a result of its early task as a sample application specifically
> demonstrating OS X text handling and typography facilities. I get the
> impression that the Apple developer expected other developers to extend
> TextEdit into other more specialised areas. After all, why else include
> it in the developers install as an open source example in OS X?

If you check htttp://www.versiontracker.com you will find numerous text
editing packages that offer more features than Apple's version.
 >> Stay informed about: TextEdit argh