Talk:TextEdit

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 This article is part of WikiProject Macintosh. This means that the WikiProject has identified it as an article pertaining to the Macintosh, but is not currently working to improve it. WikiProject Macintosh itself is an attempt to improve, grow, standardize, and attain featured status for Wikipedia's articles related to Macintosh and Apple Inc. We need all your help, so join in today!
Start This article has been rated as Start-Class on the assessment scale.
High This article is on a subject of high-importance within Macs for inclusion in Wikipedia 1.0.

Contents

[edit] Other text editors

The sentence "Mac OS X, as a Unix-based operating system, also includes emacs, vi and pico as well as other terminal-based text editors." doesn't seem to flow with the rest of the intro. I'm not sure the best way to fix this, so I'm leaving it as it is for now. -- Matthew0028 21:32, 11 April 2006 (UTC)

I seem to remember a program called Tex-Edit on a 68K mac I saw a month ago, is it the same Program as TextEdit?

It is not the same thing, although I believe it is also available for Mac OS X. Wikifan42 13:15, 1 July 2006 (UTC)

Yes, you're thinking of Tex-Edit Plus, available for 68k, PPC & 80x86 Macs. Honestly, I'd say its better than BBEdit. 67.180.206.34 (talk) 03:16, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Linux Equivalent?

TextEdit is the strongest text editor I know of that is also lightweight, especially since it reads and writes rtf documents. If the source code is really freely published under the GNU, is there a Linux equivalent, and can a link be posted here?--72.75.82.125 02:33, 30 September 2006 (UTC)

Try textedit.app for GNUstep. Don't expect the same Mac OS X experience, however, since much of the present Mac version depends on proprietary API not found elsewhere. +mt 21:54, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:Apple TextEdit.png

Image:Apple TextEdit.png is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 19:50, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Open source - what license?

The article says it's open source ... what license is it under? (I just opened it on this Mac and "About TextEdit" doesn't say anything about a license.) - David Gerard 18:53, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Not a word processor

I really like the program, but I think it's way too much of a stretch to call TextEdit a word processor, it's even called TextEdit for gosh sake. I'll remove it from the categories and clean up the article in a while if no one objects. 67.180.206.34 (talk) 03:16, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

I think of TextEdit as a word processor, but a basic one. A word processor is, to my understanding, anything used for typing documents. TextEdit doesn't have all the features that other word processors do, but that helps make it smaller and faster. If you want to add things other than text (such as pictures) you should not use TextEdit. But if you're just typing a paper, it is one of the faster word processors. R41 tmf (talk) 01:04, 20 February 2008 (UTC)