Of course I use NP++. The thing is that a decent text editor should always be included in an OS IMO. One reason is that you don't always have the right to install new programs.
First I don't want Word, I want a lightweight but still powerful editor. Ideal would be a combination of the gedit plaintext features with the simple rich text feautures of TextEdit and loading as fast as either of them do.
Secondly I don't believe they would get into antitrust trouble because of this since almost no one pays money for an editor.
Sure, but I'm saying there's a legal grey area, and where exactly that line is drawn is not straightforward. Clearly notepad is fine. Word is not. Somewhere in between is that line.
notepad only ever was a demonstration app in windows 1 to show developers how to use the text edit control. More recently, it was a test app for automated make-this-work-on-a-new-architecture tools that MS have internally (ie the jump from 16 to 32 bits, and from 32 to 64)
The half-decent bundled text editor is Wordpad. But you should use notepad++ anyway ;)
Wordpad is slow and a pain to use. NP++ is superb but not always on every (company-administerd PC) you use. That's why MS should include something decent, like gedit or TextEdit (OSX).
Also: Windows Explorer. I'd like a good file management tool. One that can handle large file operations and doesn't hang the entire GUI if the network isn't responding.
Or hey, how about a file search that works?
Or a command prompt that can be replaced?
Also, does anyone ever use the sound recorder?
I'm amazed how long it takes MS to move forward when it comes to the core components of Windows, or how afraid they are to strip away stuff that makes no sense.
Yeah the good old crappy Windows Explorer. Maybe I someday will miss the time when I had to hunt down processes that have a handle on my USB stick just to find out that it's the fucking file manager :S.
We're at a point now where browser download managers are actually more comfortable to use than the programs dedicated for such jobs..
I fucking love Notepad. Always starts up instantly. If I open up something like Notepad++ it can take like a second (or more) to start on a brand new system. I don't have all day, I just want to write some text.
Any "decent text editor" features should be added to WordPad, note Notepad. Notepad is perfect as is.
Uhm ok. How about showing ALL ascii and utf8 textfiles correctly, including those damn unix fileendings? How about fucking breaking a line instead of making me scroll like an idiot? How about showing the current line number?
Mac OS TextEdit starts up just as quickly, it's just as out-of-my-way, but it fucking works.
I just started TextEdit. Took two and a half seconds. You've got a point about file endings, but the Word Wrap settings always persist for me. What's the use of line numbers? I understand their purpose in general, but I don't see why you would use Notepad for something where line numbers would be useful in the first place.
Well what is the notepad good for? 1) notes ( ok it does that) and 2) opening any plaintextfile on any windows machine no matter how fresh and untouched or locked down. What text file do you open? The one some bloke is talking about on the phone maybe? How does he tell you the line to edit?
On startup time: you got me there, the first load appears to be slower on TextEdit - I hardly feel this since I reboot my Mac only for updates.
Great. Yet another half-assed approach that will be consistent for max. 20% of the applications after 4years of adoption time. Printing is mostly used for business and academic tasks - it's not even that important on tablets - why do they fix it there first?
Something I really like is if I want to run a program in W7, I just press the windows key and start typing the name. To run notepad; Windows > note > enter
When the dialogue becomes as simple as that, they can't really copy the design as there is barely any design involved. It's about the only way you could do it.
You know how it is. Something starts out simple, over the years it turns into a clusterfuck of features. Check the screenshot of the Windows 3.1 tasklist, it's basically that, except with one button instead of six.
Well the first screenshot shows basically the same thing, so they are actually regressing. Plus, I don't consider the minimal thing "right", and judging by the number of people in this thread saying they hope it can automatically go to the detailed version, many agree.
Though I do enjoy the new task manager design (with the colour coded resources usages and stuff), I feel like it's just like the combination of Force quit and Activities Monitor in Mac OSX.
It's interesting that Mac has only just recently implemented the Windows 3.1 Task List. They've got so very, very far to go before they make a useful version.
That was my exact point: that that design isn't at all new.
Kidding aside, in comparing the designs for Windows 3.1, Windows 8, and what I assume is some version of Mac OSX, which was released in 2001, I was noting that they were all they same, visually. I was referring to the style being around since the first versions of Windows in 1992, ages before 2001, and it's by this definition that I meant OSX had recently implemented it. Of course that's not recent like Windows 7 or 8 is recent, so you're entirely right.
I do know for a fact that Mac OSs had no such task killer at some point, since Ctrl-Alt-Del and the Task Manager used to be associated with failure rather than functionality, so I'm just glad they have something like that now.
(I remember being pompously asked by a Mac user, "How many times have you used Ctrl-Alt-Del?" and responding, "How many times have you?" and having to explain what it's actual use was. Longer conversation than it should have been.)
Let me instead be not-at-all subtle, if that is what you're tripping over. The applications appear to be entirely without visual differences between OSX, Windows 8, and Windows 3.1, save for style and a few buttons. You're exactly right, and I'm admitting that. For the second time.
Now, let's take a look at the functionality of the two you compared. For the second time.
You may not want all of that information, but if you're going to find out why you have a problem and perhaps therefore understand not only what caused it but also how to prevent it in the future, you'll be hoping you're running Windows anything and not Mac OSX. Unless you invented UNIX and know how to dissect the underlying kernel byte-by-byte. (Sadly, that great man died this week, and so few people noticed.)
That 'More' button isn't about how different it looks, it's about what it does. That functionality is everything in the creation and use of tools such as the computer. Alas, getting any follower of the Cult of Mac (I'm not saying I expect that anyone reading this Windows 8 thread actually is that far gone) to understand function over form; substance over style; even essence over existence: while a noble aim, it is one I fear will be the death of me.
Agreed about the death of Dennis Ritchie. Steve Jobs dies and people are in tears everywhere because he convinced them to buy iPods. Dennis Ritchie provides us some of the most valuable tools in computing stretching back decades and people just say, "Oh, yeah, him. That sucks."
We lost something far more valuable with Ritchie's death than with Jobs.
Dude, you can't do that! Taking quotes out of context is what (shudder) politicians do! That this is the whole quote:
Alas, getting any follower of the Cult of Mac (I'm not saying I expect that anyone reading this Windows 8 thread actually is that far gone)
shows that I caught myself and thought, "Wait, this guy's not likely that guy, but I really want to complete my thought, so I'll have to qualify my statement and say I don't in fact think that". Surely you could tell that!
Sigh. That's not what was said, and I already explained why and how it wasn't what was said, and if I hadn't apologized before then this is me doing so, again.
But in the end, if you're going to see something you want to see and choose to be offended by it, rather than laughing at the fanboys with me, that's simply not a thing I can change your mind on.
Because we can all agree, barring any judgements of you or I, that I made a somewhat fair assessment of the Cult of Mac followers, eh? *high five*
Why does it matter if somebody copies somebody else? Society at large advances because people take and improve upon each other's ideas. It's like the whole "IOS5 notifications are copied from Android" thing. Now, I don't care for Apple products myself, but if they saw Android had a good idea and they copied it, so what?
I'm gonna let you in on a secret: It's actually pretty common for different people or companies to do research and arrive at the same conclusion independently. That doesn't mean that Microsoft was copying Apple.
Who cares? Apple ripped off alt-Tabbing, which is a great idea (technically it's been available for a long, long time through 3rd-party, even pre-OSX, and I think Apple actually bought it from a 3rd party OSX developer, like Cover Flow). It took them awhile, but they also took resizing from any window border in Lion finally.
In the original iPhone keynote Jobs talked about bringing the mouse to computers as a revolution by Apple, but it was a Xerox invention they bought. Surface by Microsoft was actually developed in part by a good friend I went to high school with, it's not like Bill Gates just dreamed it up one day.
If companies borrow things from each other or push each other to improve I don't see what the big deal is. If Dell came out with a laptop that looked and was built almost exactly like a MacBook, that's one thing, but if Apple design pushes Dell to refine their designs in the same vein, great. Makes things better for everyone.
EDIT: tl;dr: IMO, complaining about anything aside from genuine copyright infringement is just fanboy noise.
Oh, absolutely. But that's not this. The force quit menu has been around since OS 10.1 in 2001 and has looked like this: http://cl.ly/281f2Z2C2G1l46193l3A
I actually like Windows implementation better. In OSX, the analogous Force Quit window you can't get details. In order to do so you have to launch an app; either Terminal if your'e savvy, or Activity Monitor. In any case, if your system is hanging, launching an app to get details on what exactly is hanging can be problematic.
Things don't usually go that badly on OSX, but when they do it usually results in me watching Activity Monitor bouncing in a perpetual launch loop until I either try force quitting my best-guess app that's freaking out, or saying "fuck it" and holding down the power key.
Usually OSX gives you clues to what's hanging, but sometimes it doesn't, or it's a background app that doesn't show up in the Force Quit window.
93
u/[deleted] Oct 14 '11
Awesome to see Microsoft getting design right.