The Old Guard of Mac Indy Apps Has Thrived For More Than 25 Years (macworld.com) 133
Glenn Fleishman, writing for MacWorld: It seems like it was only yesterday that I first used BareBones Software's BBEdit, but in actuality, yesterday is so far away -- 25 years, in fact. With all the twists and turns across more than two decades of Apple as a company, Mac hardware, and the underlying operating system, you might think that BBEdit stands alone as a continuously-developed app shepherded largely or exclusively by the same independent developer -- an app without a giant company behind it. As it turns out, BBEdit is one of several apps that's been around the block more than a few times.
The longevity of indie apps is more extraordinary when you consider the changes Apple put the Mac through from the early 1990s to 2018. Apple switched from Motorola 680x0 processors to PowerPC to Intel chips, from 32-bit to 64-bit code, and among supported coding languages. It revved System 7 to 8 to 9, then to Unix across now 15 major releases (from 10.0 to 10.14). That's a lot for any individual programmer or small company to cope with. Bare Bones's head honcho, Rich Siegel, and the developers behind three other long-running Mac software programs shared with me their insight on development histories for over 25 years, what's changed the most during that time, and any hidden treasures users haven't yet found. You can hear more on BareBones Software's in this recent episode of The Talk Show, a podcast by DaringFireball's John Gruber.
The longevity of indie apps is more extraordinary when you consider the changes Apple put the Mac through from the early 1990s to 2018. Apple switched from Motorola 680x0 processors to PowerPC to Intel chips, from 32-bit to 64-bit code, and among supported coding languages. It revved System 7 to 8 to 9, then to Unix across now 15 major releases (from 10.0 to 10.14). That's a lot for any individual programmer or small company to cope with. Bare Bones's head honcho, Rich Siegel, and the developers behind three other long-running Mac software programs shared with me their insight on development histories for over 25 years, what's changed the most during that time, and any hidden treasures users haven't yet found. You can hear more on BareBones Software's in this recent episode of The Talk Show, a podcast by DaringFireball's John Gruber.
30th Annivery NeXTCube (Score:3, Interesting)
We're not too far away from the 30th anniversary of NeXT.
Apple should make a commemorative system for all NeXT fans.
What's your wish list for the new NeXTCube?
Re: (Score:1)
The first Cubes actually came out in 1988, IIRC, so we're due for a 30th anniversary if this is correct. The refreshed Turbo systems came out in 91 or 93, I don't remember.
Make a system with that same sexy case, keep the back plane design but build it around PCI-E.
The original NeXT keyboards were exceedingly nice. Make modern USB versions with an "L-shaped" enter key.
Oh, and don't charge me $1400.00 for a floppy drive, K thanks.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:3)
What's your wish list for the new NeXTCube?
Unfuck the Dock. The Dock was always an annoying use of screen real estate when it was at the side of a 4:3 ratio display. You really wanted it at the bottom. But then we moved to 16:9 ratio displays, where there's plenty of room at the side of the display, so what does Apple do? MOVE IT TO THE BOTTOM. Not just that, but when the Dock was pinned to the upper-right, it was in a predictable location. But now that it's in the center-bottom, it grows in both directions, so everything on it moves every time any
Re: (Score:2)
Um, unless they killed-off the option, you can pick where the Dock is located (bottom or either side).
But can you put it in the corner? And even if you could, would the furthest pixel in that corner be an activation location for the first dock item?
Re: (Score:2)
This is important, since a longstanding UI feature of macOS (clear back to the Flying Toaster days!) are what they call "Hot Corners".
The corners weren't special back in the flying toaster days, except to certain applications. There wasn't anything special about them to the OS. Maybe there is now, I wouldn't know. My mac is both old and in storage. But various applications make sense of them on Windows, too.
SGI Indy? (Score:1)
I thought Indy was an archeologist. Anonymous Cowards, please, spelling counts.
Re: (Score:1)
Because my spellchecker didn't catch my mistake, dumbass.
Re: (Score:2)
Nor did I catch it while reading ... I simply listen to the sound in my head ... and my head knew the word is "archaeologist" when my eyes saw the arch and the gist ...
Back in the old days. (Score:3, Interesting)
Back in the old days, the most ardent Mac enthusiasts pooh-poohed unix. This was back when Apple was blowing many millions of dollars on their 'next generation Mac OS' which was a flop. Apple's developers really aren't good enough to produce a robust preemptive multitasking OS. They ended up just piggybacking on unix.
Speaking to third party Apple developers, they have always been a captive group. The tools back in the 90's were expensive and you had to pretty much be a club member to do much at all.
Re: (Score:2)
To prevent people from thinking that an SE/30 was a complete joke because there was only MacOS to run on it?
Re: (Score:2)
I had Mac OS (several), A/UX and another unix system on my SE (with an 68030 extension card), and another third party unix, I don't remember the name, starts with a T, I think (I'm not at home or I could go into the cellar and check as I still have the box). And later Linux 68k.
On the other hand, Mac OS up to System 6/System 7 was a fine system. The alternative was either Windows (3.0 - 3.11, Win 32) or a Workstation, like an Apollo or SGi. With alternative I mean: "the other thing", obviously windows was n
Re: (Score:3)
It's been speculated that Apple only provided a version of Unix to comply with requirements for obtaining government contracts.
But I do recall a number of Mac proponents asserting that the GUI was vastly superior to command-line, and that Unix was a dinosaur.
Jef Raskin, founder of the Macintosh project, said at one point: "We have a whole valley full of people talking UNIX versus MS-DOS. What do you need any of that for? Just throw it all out; get rid of all that nonsense. Maybe you need it for computer sci
Re: (Score:3)
Yeah, the Cat was a failure, but it did kind of prove his point.
"Canon, possibly because the moribund Electronic Typewriter Division had been given the task, failed to market the product effectively, and it is now a dead cat.
"How in the world do you sell something that's different? That's the biggest problem. The world's not quite ready to believe. It's like in the early days at Apple, they said, 'What's it good for?' We couldn't give a really good answer so they assumed the machine wasn't going to sell. Bu
Re: (Score:2)
Well, ... in lynx? Likely not. Well, I certainly not. But it would
But I do recall a number of Mac proponents asserting that the GUI was vastly superior to command-line,
The command line has two superior usages: shell (as in dealing with files, but also scripting which boils down to using files) and vi(m). I hardly can imagine another use for it, the occasional SQL I do in a "command line window" in an IDE, not in a terminal window. And here we have it: window. GUI already.
And your posted the post I reply to
Re: (Score:2)
Right, but you can do scripting, queries, editing, etc. in a GUI.
What I could never figure out is why they didn't add CLI-like powers to the GUI, i.e. drag-and-drop pipes, stdin/stdout options, find/select and a bunch of other stuff that is what makes Unix so great to work with.
Is it just lack of imagination, being unable to come up with a graphical metaphor for CLI-style operations?
Re: (Score:2)
For casual computing by non-experts, GUI is the way to go. Experts and enthusiasts benefit from the programmatic capabilities that CLI provides, but the learning curve to attain that power is steeper, and returns little benefit to casual users.
Re: (Score:2)
Sure ... and that is why most Mac Software was written in either the "Mac App Environment" or under A/UX ... idiot.
BBEdit (Score:2)
BBEdit falls short of being able to do simple syntax highlighting without helper applications.
It's unable to deal with simple nesting. For example, it can't properly highlight the following, even on a single line...
{keyword [keyword {keyword content} thing] content}
...even creaky old mcedit, a component of midnight commander [midnight-commander.org], can handle that easily with a simple syntax definition that produces this:
o square braces color 1
o left-square-brace-adjacent keywords color 2
o sqiggly braces color 3
o left-sqiggly-bra
Does it do it well? (Score:2)
Does it do syntax highlighting well, by using an external program / library, thereby leveraging all of the work done by an for people who don't use BBEedit? That sounds like a winner to me. Why should each editor separately implement parsing of every version of every language, when we can have a better result with less effort by separating parsing programming languages from a text editor. Two different jobs.
Not the issue (Score:1)
No. The external program does it. Well or otherwise.
That's not what is at issue here. This is user-defined parsing of simple formatted text, using facilities provided by the editor. As to why this is a good idea (and why BBEdit does it, albeit poorly), [a] there are basically an infinite number of structured formatting possibilities for text, even j
Re: (Score:2)
> Simple parsing, IMHO anyway, shouldn't require external code.
You're entitled to your opinions. A mathematically proven fact is that only Perl can parse Perl. If you want fully correct syntax highlighting for Perl, you have to implement the entire Perl language. In other words, only /usr/bin/perl can do it. Because of optional semi-colons, t-sql (Microsoft SQL) is just as difficult. You can think correct syntax highlighting "should be" easy, but the fact is you have to implement a complete programmin
I see you're a strawman builder. (Score:2)
I said simple parsing, and I didn't say a single word about Perl. So your post... into the bit bucket.
Next time, try addressing the points that were actually made.
Re:BBEdit (Score:4, Insightful)
Causation (Score:2)
Tell it to the author of TFA, and TFS. They started this. :)
Re: (Score:2)
Naturally you only talked about girls, I like that. Where do you work?
Re: (Score:2)
Shame that everyone's ego prevented them from actually learning.
Yes never saw the draw (Score:2)
Have to admit, even though I moved to the Mac platform some time ago, I never really got what the truly long time Mac users saw in programs like BBEdit...
For me one draw of the Mac was how easy it was to run Emacs on it. Once you know Emacs well, it's pretty hard for any other editor to pull you away.
Re:Yes never saw the draw (Score:5, Funny)
>For me one draw of the Mac was how easy it was to run Emacs on it. Once you know
>Emacs well, it's pretty hard for any other editor to pull you away.
No kidding.
Every time I try, my cat disappears, my bank accounts get frozen, and mysterious messages threatening the cat flicker across the screen until I reload EMACS and enter M-C-A-uncle! and then C-M-purge-competing-editors-with-extreme-prejudice.
My dog used to disappear, too, but I had too many typos on the last command, and never saw him again . . .
hawk
Re: (Score:2)
Did you try to deinstall EMACS?
I'm sorry for your dog. I'm sure your cat liked him. Probably more than she like(d/s) you. But well, so are the cats. My cat does not allow me to come closer than 1m to her ... problem probably is: she does not know she is my cat.
Re: (Score:1)
I always thought you where a troll.
Telling us you live in China, but having a "sex doll, too" and your wife is fine with it.
Your half german ancestry (or do I mix you up?)
Your weird stance to nuclear energy and renewables.
But know we know: you are a trollll!
Who in his sane mind runs Emacs on a Mac? Vim is preinstalled! And you can get GVim ... just download it!!
In case you need mental help, don't be despaired, brother! I call you now my brother, as it is common in asian countries, I can help you to get over
Re: (Score:2)
I spare me the usual answer on posts like this (but as you are curious I write it here: why would anyone want/need this?)
So: which other editor supports different syntax highlighting for keywords based on the leading (, { or [ ?
I started a few years ago to disable all highlighting, except for having some things bold or underlined. Syntax highlighting might once have been a good idea ... but the colour noise a typical IDE produces in our days is completely useless.
In early Java coding styles it was promoted
Good people (Score:3)
More than BBEdit (Score:4, Insightful)
I've been using GraphicConverter and DefaultFolder since Mac OS 7 on PowerPC (and I think even back to 68000.) DefaultFolder, in particular, had to be redesigned from the ground up a couple years ago not because of change of processor, but due to changes in how Mac OS X handles security features and system extensions.
Although it's not old enough to make "the old guard", I'm a huge fan of Aquamacs, a very well done EMACS port/reworking to be consistent with the Apple user interface. (Real EMACS beats BBEdit any day, IMHO.)
Re: (Score:2)
Never could get into Aquamacs... I guess it's because I still use Emacs on Linux (both in X and over ssh) daily so I want my Emacs on my mac to be as Linux-like as possible. That's why I always use: https://emacsformacosx.com/ [emacsformacosx.com]
Like it says: it's just Emacs... no extra BS...
Re: (Score:2)
I used to run System 7 software on my Amiga under emulation... Well, the CPU wasn't emulated so it was pretty fast, in fact I seem to recall the fastest Mac available back then was an Amiga.
The OS was weird around that time. No real multitasking but it looked kinda nice. There was some software available for Mac that you couldn't get on the Amiga. I think StuffIt was the one I used the most, to open archives.
Re: (Score:2)
Well, the CPU wasn't emulated so it was pretty fast, in fact I seem to recall the fastest Mac available back then was an Amiga.
Macs were 100% graphic computers with no graphics acceleration. Every pixel had to be laboriously milled by the CPU, and pounded into place with a wooden mallet. The Amiga had hardware to accelerate all common graphics operations (and then some) which is most of what made it faster. The first accelerated graphics option for the Macintosh was the 8â24 GC, which actually had more processing power onboard than the host CPU given that it was designed for the Macintosh II series. Further, I can't find a MSR
Re: (Score:2)
The other issue was that the Mac never got an 060, where as the Amiga did.
That's probably the oldest app I have installed (Score:2)
PopChar is a close second.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Yes.
And "apps" are directories ... they copied that idea from RISC OS ... with subdirectories for libraries, and other resources.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
HFS (Apple, 1985) had resource forks, which let you have a directory inside a file.
No, it didn't. It let you have structured data inside a file. That's not a directory, which is a filesystem element. And further, Apple only did this because they didn't put enough RAM into their computer, and they had to load things in tiny bits. Not just data, but the actual code had to be broken up into tiny pieces. (Their filesystem also stunk on ice, Macs always had poor filesystem performance all the way up until OSX.) Apple built a graphical computer with no graphics acceleration, nor enough room in
Re: (Score:2)
RiscOS required an Application name to start with an "!" character, e.g. !Edit. Then it was treated as an "executable" and a double click would start the "runme.bas" file (not sure about the name), which acted as a kind of shell script and started the real exe (if it itself was not the executable). You could also drag and drop files on the Application.
Great Mac Shareware (Score:4, Informative)
GraphicsConverter - basically a GUI version of ImageMagick - could open absolutely anything, and pretty damn fast at it
SoundApp - GraphicConverter for sound files. It was the only thing fast enough to play high quality MP3s on my old PowerMac 6100
Fetch - THE FTP client. Only thing I've used that's even close to being as simple and clean is FileZilla
PlayerPro - All in one MOD file player with cool as hell spectrum analyzers, oscilloscopes, per-track VU meters...
Stuffit Expander / Compressor / ShrinkWrap - Open any archive or disk image file and do pretty much anything with it - the coolest thing is you could (trivially) script it to automatically expand something, drop the archive into one folder, then put the contents in another folder depending on the file type.
ZTerm - Dialup client with Zmodem - essential for BBSes
NIH Image - Freeware image editing software designed to do medical imaging analysis - but it had all kinds of crazy filters and color modification algorithms that let you do Photoshop-style color channel operations for free
Realmz - Massive tile-based role playing game with tons of character options, weapons and gear
I’m a satisfied customer (Score:5, Insightful)
Back when they charged over a hundred bucks for the software, I did wonder who the heck pays that much for a text editor. But eventually they started offering a free “lite” version (originally the lite version was cheaper, but not free) - and I found that to be really handy. After several years of using BBEdit Lite and then TextWrangler (they rebranded the free one), I decided to buy BBEdit - not because I needed the additional features, but to support the company.
A lot of well-known Mac companies have bit the dust over the past decade (we hardly knew ye, FreeVerse)... but it’s nice that there are still a few stalwarts like BareBones and Omni left.
Re: (Score:2)
There are plenty more than Omni etc. just browse the Application store for Applications for Macs.
Funny about Omni is, I pointed out in several emails that time in Germany e.g. in worksheets is written with an H (hora) for hours, not an S (Stunden). However the guy doing the translations insists on using S instead of H for timespans, times etc. Hence no one in corporate business buys the license for OmniOutliner ... a printout with S instead of H is completely useless. A year that is not a leap year has 8760
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Really? You wrote yourself a mini OO, which can read old files, impressive :D ... but gave up after a few days daddeling with it ... but I don't remember what annoyed me so much.
I used OO last time about 4 years ago, wanted to introduce it in a company
Re: (Score:2)
Oh, and it intentionally doesn't compress the XML file and does pretty-print it on output, so it works better with things like git.
Re: (Score:2)
I looked at your git project. You did a lot of work, Kudos! ... wow.
Never noticed that you only can have one currency
Re:I’m a satisfied customer (Score:4, Informative)
You can actually run BBedit for free now - you basically get the TextWrangler feature set in that case. You can choose to pay them for the "premium" features, or not - but in either case you run the same app.
Yes! GraphicsConverter! (Score:5, Interesting)
Interesting little recent story with that one....
My workplace recently had a challenge. Our Finance dept. had been using a couple of Windows software applications made by EMC for the purpose of scanning in, indexing and providing view access to checks and invoices. Back when all of these were first set up, EMC allowed people to license them individually and use them as "building blocks" for your own document handling solutions. We hired a consulting firm to make them work in tandem with the Great Plains accounting package.
Since then, it seems that EMC has become more focused on selling them as a bundled document management solution. Problem is? As we've upgraded Windows past 7 and on to 10, it broke compatibility with these programs. On the server side, we can't even do all of the latest . NET upgrades or security patches without it causing problems. The cost to pay for the upgrades and support licenses to get current versions of the tools is way more than we can justify for what we do with them. So we decided to migrate to a new solution.
The first big stumbling block to migration was exporting all of our existing scanned images. Apparently, a really oddball version of TIFF was implemented in the EMC software and nothing else was able to open the files. We we able to contact GraphicsConverter's author and he took up the challenge of reverse engineering the file format and adding support to his software package. Thanks to that effort, we could finally set up a batch conversion using GraphicsConverter!
IMO, it really is the premiere application out there, regardless of OS platform, for viewing and working with just about ALL image formats out there. If his software can't work with it, he's willing to make it happen -- even this long after developing the product.
Re: (Score:1)
The actual arc of Mac software development was not so much changes from one processor family to another or 16 bit to 32 bit to 64 bit architectures, but APIs. The original Mac OS offered Object Pascal and the Macintosh Toolbox. Then there was MacApp and the Think Class Library (TCL) in Pascal and later versions of MacApp and CodeWarrior's PowerPlant in C++. The merger with Next brought Rhapsody and Yellow Box. Then there were Objective-C with Cocoa or Carbon APIs. And, there was also the necessary transitio
Fun and Games (Score:2)
Brings to Mind... (Score:2)
PCalc on the Mac is now worse than its 90s version (Score:2)
With Spotlight there's also fewer reasons to use it casually since you can just type into the search bar. With more complex stuff it's just about as easy to enter in to Wolfram
amazing! (Score:2)
developers who asks money for an editor supports it! how does he do it? it boggles the mind!
now excuse me, while i enjoy my debian system...
It still doesn't suck! (Score:1)
Also a shout-out to Stick Software! Mojave fractured Fracture and Satori, my all-time favorite screensavers. I contacted the publisher and he said he would eventually fix them. [This is software I licensed over 10 years ago, mind you].
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Did those platforms have three major CPU architecture changes, two completely different OS core and a 32-to-64-bit upgrade path in the last three decades?
I think what the parent A/C meant to say is that despite all the work required, some people want to make their software available for Mac.
Re: Wow! (Score:2)
Windows has long supported ARM and Itanium. The whole point of the Win32 API/MFC/WinForms/Aero/other is so Windows apps can be built on all platforms.
Oh really.... (Score:3)
Windows has long supported ARM and Itanium.
How much indie Windows software added ARM and Titanium support?
ALL Mac indie software has (by necessity) followed Apple through architecture and pretty dramatic OS changes, especially in terms of frameworks (Windows programming has evolved, but is Windows programming today really so different from older Win32 development)?
Re: Oh really.... (Score:2)
The point is most software "just works" with a recompile.
Re: (Score:3)
ALL Mac indie software has (by necessity) followed Apple through architecture and pretty dramatic OS changes, especially in terms of frameworks
It would be more correct to say some indie software has followed Apple despite all the changes.
is Windows programming today really so different from older Win32 development)
I'm perplexed that you appear to think this is an issue. On the contrary, I see the concern for consistency and the care about backward compatibility as huge advantages of the Win32 platform over the Apple offering, both for programmers and for users.
How can that be perplexing (Score:1)
I'm perplexed that you appear to think this is an issue. On the contrary, I see the concern for consistency and the care about backward compatibility as huge advantages of the Win32 platform
Just like hoarders have a major advantage over normal people because they can bring out a ten year old bag of poop or every broken toaster they have ever owned on demand. Can most people say that? Hell no. Same with the Windows API's, if you need to call a bag of poop by good Windows has made sure that crappy old API
Re: (Score:2)
Sometimes people will not move to something better until they have no other choice.
Yup, people should really shut up about "choice" and do what their betters tell them to.And if they're still reluctant, then choice needs to be forcefully taken away from them, so they get on with the program, dammit.
Glad to see you subscribe to the courageous attitude that brought us such triumphs as the Office ribbon, the notch, Windows 8, no headphone jacks and New Coke!
It's not about betters, it's about progress (Score:1)
Yup, people should really shut up about "choice" and do what their betters tell them to.
Choice is good but it can be limiting too. Look at any study of creativity and you find that too much choice is the mind-killer...
You ALWAYS have a choice to move to another platform. Just like I left the crufty ever decaying platform that was Windows to go to a platform not afraid of clean breaks when needed - and I as a developer have been greatly rewarded for that.
Glad to see you subscribe to the courageous attitude
Re: (Score:2)
On the contrary, I see the concern for consistency and the care about backward compatibility as huge advantages of the Win32 platform over the Apple offering, both for programmers and for users.
Then you are obviously not in the software business and not a demanding computer user either.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Have you any idea of the history behind the *nixes? Apparently not.
But if you want to take a look a a similar product: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vim_(text_editor)
It has been in development for more than 25 years and is inspired/based on an even older editor (vi, from 1976). Ran on a lot of now dead OSes / hardware and it still alive on lots of operating systems.
Unix programs, yes (Score:5, Informative)
> Did those platforms have three major CPU architecture changes, two completely different OS core and a 32-to-64-bit upgrade path in the last three decades?
Yes, in the case of Unix. In fact most of the old Unix programs supported three different CPU architectures *simultaneously*. Instead of version 1.0 supporting one architecture and version 4.0 supporting a different architecture, all versions supported all architectures. They did so partly by using some *simple* abstractions so that the applications mostly didn't care what the CPU architecture was. (Complex abstractions can make these things harder, simple abstractions make them easier).
Two different "OS core" - yep, completely changed out the entire kernel. Most Unix software runs fine on any of three or four different kernels. Originally Unix, then most switched over to Linus's Not Unix (Linux), and they run fine on MacOS, which is derived from an old Unix. Again simultaneously - the developers didn't have to switch. Simple abstractions like "everything is a file" mean the application doesn't care which kernel is providing fopen(). The application only cares that some kernel allows reading and writing of files. Since everything is a file, fopen(), read(), and write() let you do whatever you want in the system.
"32-to-64-bit upgrade path"? Linux supported x64 before x64 hardware existed. At the same time, the same version of the kernel supported 32 bit, and someone even rannitnon an 8 bit processor.
Re: (Score:1)
no, that is because they did not choose a absolute dumpster fire of a platform to stick to
the only reason these people are special is cause no one else wants to deal with apple's constant fuck you we changed everything shit
Re: (Score:2)
I just had a look, the version of Corel PhotoPaint I'm running on this box (Win 8.1) has a copyright date of 1998. If I recall I bought it surplus in 2002 or so, it's been installed on a few Windows machines since then without needing to be rewritten or patched.
Re: (Score:1)
> The original Visicalc on Windows still works
The original VisiCalc was for Apple II, and it was discontinued before Windows 1 was even launched.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:3)
Just goes to show how much better Apple is than anything else. No other platform/company has a history of community and development that is as rich and long lasting.
The one big thing Apple did better than anyone else was deploy a Unix-based operatimng system that users and developers both like. It's the OS that Linux might have become had it not been for all that poisonous bickering and fragmentation.
Re: (Score:2)
The one big thing Apple did better than anyone else was deploy a Unix-based operatimng system that users and developers both like.
I don't like it.
It's the OS that Linux might have become had it not been for all that poisonous bickering and fragmentation.
Please, fuck no.
This attitude is ruinin the experience of Linux. Linux was never going to be a better Apple than Apple, just as it wasn't a better Windows 95 than Windows 95 or a better XP than XP.
That was despite lots of effort. And it sucked. Instead of do
Re: (Score:3)
This sort of attidude is why the fuckwits at GNOME want to kill off middle click paste. Even though Apple have a crap version that only works in the terminal. but because Apple only have a crap version, Linux should too!
Huh? Apple doesn't have middle-click paste, it has command-v paste everywhere. The main thing I miss about macOS on other platforms is having the same copy and paste shortcuts in the terminal as everywhere else. Other platforms (including crappy X11 DEs that originated on '90s PCs, but not proper UNIX DEs that originated on machines that had a meta key) decided to overload Control-C for paste and therefore made something incompatible with any environment that uses control key combinations for sending con
Re: (Score:2)
Huh? Apple doesn't have middle-click paste,
It does, like I said, in the terminal only. Seriously try it in terminal.app. It works. But it's a very poor shadow of what we have on X.
The main thing I miss about macOS on other platforms is having the same copy and paste shortcuts in the terminal as everywhere else. Other platforms (including crappy X11 DEs that originated on '90s PCs, but not proper UNIX DEs that originated on machines that had a meta key) decided to overload Control-C
Yep. Old unixy things fro
Re: (Score:2)
Linux was never going to be a better Apple than Apple,
It was. It totally was. With Emerald, Compiz, avant-window-navigator, and GNOME 2, Linux was a better Apple than Apple. I had literally every bit of mac lovers' beloved UI functionality, but it was also completely configurable in a way that MacOS will never be. You can't actually build Emerald any more, nor AWN. Well, you kind of can, but neither one works correctly. The versions of libraries they depend upon won't build any more, and they won't build correctly against the new versions because those librari