Groups > comp.sys.mac.apps > #28976 > unrolled thread

How do mac users create a blank text file where you want it?

Started by	"Adam H. Kerman" <ahk@chinet.com>
First post	2015-04-20 00:40 +0000
Last post	2015-04-22 09:45 -0400
Articles	20 on this page of 393 — 26 participants

Back to article view | Back to comp.sys.mac.apps

Page 12 of 20 — ← Prev page 1 … 10 11 [12] 13 14 … 20 Next page →

#29394

From	Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com>
Date	2015-04-23 09:00 +1200
Message-ID	<230420150900051117%YourName@YourISP.com>
In reply to	#29359

In article <5537d514$0$38646$b1db1813$65575428@news.astraweb.com>,
Warren Oates <warren.oates@gmail.com> wrote:
> In article <1m3bbb7.1cp6z8y8be1q1N%jamiekg@wizardling.geek.nz>,
>  jamiekg@wizardling.geek.nz (Jamie Kahn Genet) wrote:
> > 
> > killfiledd
> 
> Killfiledd  sounds like a town in Wales. You'd pronounce it 
> kill-FILL-edth.
> 
> [Note: this is not a flame]
> 
> (Dai).

Can't be, it's nowhere near long enough and there's far too many vowels
in it.  ;-)

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#29346

From	David Ritz <dritz@mindspring.com>
Date	2015-04-22 09:06 -0500
Message-ID	<alpine.OSX.2.20.1504220856530.31550@mako.ath.cx>
In reply to	#29339

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
NotDashEscaped: You need GnuPG to verify this message

On Tuesday, 21 April 2015 22:53 -0700, 
 in article <210420152253587119%michelle@michelle.org>, 
 Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> wrote:

> Has anyone noticed that Adam H. Kerman seems to have vanished?

He popped up in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, a day or so after 
dropping out of this thread.  His questions there were answered 
to his satisfaction.

Adam has been posting to Usenet, using the same address, for 
significantly longer than a decade.  While this may have been his 
first appearence in comp.sys.mac.*, he's been around a while.

-- 
David Ritz <dritz@mindspring.com>
 Be kind to animals; kiss a shark.

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2

iEYEARECAAYFAlU3qtcACgkQUrwpmRoS3uuELgCfRd/vVp26jL+tm5cOMFwRJUsH
4SgAoMNFRKYO6ab4oWKlOVz9e8epiko6
=UG/Y
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#29347

From	AV3 <arvimide@earthlink.net>
Date	2015-04-22 11:13 -0400
Message-ID	<mh8dqc$fi0$1@news.albasani.net>
In reply to	#29346

On 4/22/15, 10:06, David Ritz wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
> NotDashEscaped: You need GnuPG to verify this message
>
> On Tuesday, 21 April 2015 22:53 -0700,
>   in article<210420152253587119%michelle@michelle.org>,
>   Michelle Steiner<michelle@michelle.org>  wrote:
>
>> Has anyone noticed that Adam H. Kerman seems to have vanished?
>
> He popped up in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, a day or so after
> dropping out of this thread.  His questions there were answered
> to his satisfaction.
>
> Adam has been posting to Usenet, using the same address, for
> significantly longer than a decade.  While this may have been his
> first appearence in comp.sys.mac.*, he's been around a while.
>

However long "Adam" has been around other news groups, he has been 
around this one under various nyms from "Vinny" to most recently 
"Sunshine" and "Sobriquet," making "inquiries" about how difficult it is 
to use MacOS compared with Linux. He "fails to understand" clear 
instruction about using Mac, claiming that his instructors agree with 
his absurd assertions, and drags out these discussions ad nauseam. Those 
who continue "assisting" him without result are partly to blame for the 
nausea.

-- 
++====+=====+=====+=====+=====+====+====+=====+=====+=====+=====+====++
||Arnold VICTOR, New York City, i. e., <arvimideQ@Wearthlink.net>    ||
||Arnoldo VIKTORO, Nov-jorkurbo, t. e., <arvimideQ@Wearthlink.net>   ||
||Remove capital letters from e-mail address for correct address/    ||
||    Forigu majusklajn literojn el e-poŝta adreso por ĝusta adreso  ||
++====+=====+=====+=====+=====+====+====+=====+=====+=====+=====+====++

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#29349

From	David Ritz <dritz@mindspring.com>
Date	2015-04-22 10:57 -0500
Message-ID	<alpine.OSX.2.20.1504221037270.31550@mako.ath.cx>
In reply to	#29347

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
NotDashEscaped: You need GnuPG to verify this message

On Wednesday, 22 April 2015 11:13 -0400, 
 in article <mh8dqc$fi0$1@news.albasani.net>, 
 AV3 <arvimide@earthlink.net> wrote:

> On 4/22/15, 10:06, David Ritz wrote:

>> Adam has been posting to Usenet, using the same address, for 
>> significantly longer than a decade.  While this may have been his 
>> first appearance in comp.sys.mac.*, he's been around a while.

> However long "Adam" has been around other news groups, he has been 
> around this one under various nyms from "Vinny" to most recently 
> "Sunshine" and "Sobriquet," making "inquiries" about how difficult 
> it is to use MacOS compared with Linux. He "fails to understand" 
> clear instruction about using Mac, claiming that his instructors 
> agree with his absurd assertions, and drags out these discussions ad 
> nauseam. Those who continue "assisting" him without result are 
> partly to blame for the nausea.

This assumes facts not in evidence.  You may believe your assumption, 
that everyone who comes from a different OS, expecting OS X to work 
exactly the same way things work under Windows or Linux, is the same 
individual, but it seems to be a lot to accept on its face.

As it happens, I agree with Adam, that the way TextEdit works isn't as 
intuitive as having the option of saving a file, in whatever format 
one desires, directly from the Save dialog.

Sure, there be trolls here, but assuming everyone with a basic 
question is a troll is counterproductive, no matter how they struggle 
with achieving there often unstated or misstated goal.

-- 
David Ritz <dritz@mindspring.com>
 "A hallucination is a fact, not an error; what is erroneous is a
  judgment based upon it."              - Bertrand Russell (1872-1970)

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2

iEYEARECAAYFAlU3xNQACgkQUrwpmRoS3uv/EgCgm6jElO/7N81Tg/cZWk1UVmDP
vqcAn0Lw7QZYnMaKQZ320ZsDXouPXYdv
=qVFi
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#29352

From	Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org>
Date	2015-04-22 09:30 -0700
Message-ID	<220420150930238316%michelle@michelle.org>
In reply to	#29349

In article <alpine.OSX.2.20.1504221037270.31550@mako.ath.cx>, David
Ritz <dritz@mindspring.com> wrote:

> > However long "Adam" has been around other news groups, he has been 
> > around this one under various nyms from "Vinny" to most recently 
> > "Sunshine" and "Sobriquet," making "inquiries" about how difficult 
> > it is to use MacOS compared with Linux. He "fails to understand" 
> > clear instruction about using Mac, claiming that his instructors 
> > agree with his absurd assertions, and drags out these discussions ad 
> > nauseam. Those who continue "assisting" him without result are 
> > partly to blame for the nausea.
> 
> This assumes facts not in evidence.  You may believe your assumption, 
> that everyone who comes from a different OS, expecting OS X to work 
> exactly the same way things work under Windows or Linux, is the same 
> individual, but it seems to be a lot to accept on its face.

There is also the matter of writing style; misconstruing suggestions;
repeating, verbatim; the same text in response to multiple messages;
picking one person as having understood his problem even though others
have expressed the same thing as that one person; etc.

> As it happens, I agree with Adam, that the way TextEdit works isn't as 
> intuitive as having the option of saving a file, in whatever format 
> one desires, directly from the Save dialog.

It makes more sense to have two modes, one for plain text, and one for
Rich Text, each of which has its own options for saving.

> Sure, there be trolls here, but assuming everyone with a basic 
> question is a troll is counterproductive, no matter how they struggle 
> with achieving there often unstated or misstated goal.

We do not make that assumption; however, we do arrive at that
conclusion when the evidence supports it, as it did with "Adam".

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#29355

From	Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com>
Date	2015-04-22 16:52 +0000
Message-ID	<cpq1v5Ft5tjU1@mid.individual.net>
In reply to	#29352

On 2015-04-22, Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> wrote:
> In article <alpine.OSX.2.20.1504221037270.31550@mako.ath.cx>, David
> Ritz <dritz@mindspring.com> wrote:
>
>> > However long "Adam" has been around other news groups, he has been 
>> > around this one under various nyms from "Vinny" to most recently 
>> > "Sunshine" and "Sobriquet," making "inquiries" about how difficult 
>> > it is to use MacOS compared with Linux. He "fails to understand" 
>> > clear instruction about using Mac, claiming that his instructors 
>> > agree with his absurd assertions, and drags out these discussions ad 
>> > nauseam. Those who continue "assisting" him without result are 
>> > partly to blame for the nausea.
>> 
>> This assumes facts not in evidence.  You may believe your assumption, 
>> that everyone who comes from a different OS, expecting OS X to work 
>> exactly the same way things work under Windows or Linux, is the same 
>> individual, but it seems to be a lot to accept on its face.
>
> There is also the matter of writing style; misconstruing suggestions;
> repeating, verbatim; the same text in response to multiple messages;
> picking one person as having understood his problem even though others
> have expressed the same thing as that one person; etc.

I have little doubt "Adam" is our resident Linux dweeb. He can change
his name, but his personality and dimwittedness give him away every
single time. David's defense of him makes me wonder about David...

>> As it happens, I agree with Adam, that the way TextEdit works isn't as 
>> intuitive as having the option of saving a file, in whatever format 
>> one desires, directly from the Save dialog.
>
> It makes more sense to have two modes, one for plain text, and one for
> Rich Text, each of which has its own options for saving.

Indeed - especially when switching between those two modes is as simple
as typing Command-Shift-T or choosing Format > Make Plain/Rich Text from
the menu bar. It also makes more sense from a design point of view. When
you convert from rich to plain text, some aspects such as text styling
(bold/italic/coloring) as well as tab spacing, attached images, and so
on) are adversely affected or completely removed. Doing it in the
document gives the user a chance to actually *see* those effects. Doing
it in the Save dialog offers no such opportunity. The user would have to
re-open the saved document to see the effects. It's a better design that
gives a better user experience.

>> Sure, there be trolls here, but assuming everyone with a basic 
>> question is a troll is counterproductive, no matter how they struggle 
>> with achieving there often unstated or misstated goal.
>
> We do not make that assumption; however, we do arrive at that
> conclusion when the evidence supports it, as it did with "Adam".

Yep.

-- 
E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my ravenous SPAM filter.
I often ignore posts from Google. Use a real news client instead.

JR

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#29353

From	Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net>
Date	2015-04-22 17:30 +0100
Message-ID	<220420151730327844%timstreater@greenbee.net>
In reply to	#29349

In article <alpine.OSX.2.20.1504221037270.31550@mako.ath.cx>, David
Ritz <dritz@mindspring.com> wrote:

>As it happens, I agree with Adam, that the way TextEdit works isn't as 
>intuitive as having the option of saving a file, in whatever format 
>one desires, directly from the Save dialog.

A trivially unimportant difference. Most people would either figure it
out for themselves, or have understood it in short order after a few
posts. As it was "Adam" is either terminally thick, or was being
deliberately obtuse with a view to trolling, or is Harry Worth.

-- 
Anyone who slaps a 'this page is best viewed with Browser X' label on
a Web page appears to be yearning for the bad old days, before the Web,
when you had very little chance of reading a document written on another
computer, another word processor, or another network. -- Tim Berners-Lee

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#29361

From	jamiekg@wizardling.geek.nz (Jamie Kahn Genet)
Date	2015-04-23 05:11 +1200
Message-ID	<1m3bfj8.1tsz9991qd9ht3N%jamiekg@wizardling.geek.nz>
In reply to	#29353

Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> wrote:

> In article <alpine.OSX.2.20.1504221037270.31550@mako.ath.cx>, David
> Ritz <dritz@mindspring.com> wrote:
> 
> >As it happens, I agree with Adam, that the way TextEdit works isn't as
> >intuitive as having the option of saving a file, in whatever format 
> >one desires, directly from the Save dialog.
> 
> A trivially unimportant difference. Most people would either figure it
> out for themselves, or have understood it in short order after a few
> posts. As it was "Adam" is either terminally thick, or was being
> deliberately obtuse with a view to trolling, or is Harry Worth.

Plus given the switch between RTF and plain text changes formatting
options available, as well as save options, it only makes sense to have
it be a menu option, instead of a 'Save As…' dialog option.
-- 
If you're not part of the solution, you're part of the precipitate.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#29365

From	JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca>
Date	2015-04-22 13:25 -0400
Message-ID	<5537d993$0$64023$b1db1813$2411a48f@news.astraweb.com>
In reply to	#29361

On 15-04-22 13:11, Jamie Kahn Genet wrote:

> Plus given the switch between RTF and plain text changes formatting
> options available, as well as save options, it only makes sense to have
> it be a menu option, instead of a 'Save As…' dialog option.

But Save_As should give you the option to save as text (stripping all
formatting). I think earlier versions of textedit had that option.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#29367

From	Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com>
Date	2015-04-22 17:35 +0000
Message-ID	<cpq4egFt5tjU6@mid.individual.net>
In reply to	#29365

On 2015-04-22, JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> wrote:
> On 15-04-22 13:11, Jamie Kahn Genet wrote:
>
>> Plus given the switch between RTF and plain text changes formatting
>> options available, as well as save options, it only makes sense to have
>> it be a menu option, instead of a 'Save As…' dialog option.
>
>
> But Save_As should give you the option to save as text (stripping all
> formatting). I think earlier versions of textedit had that option.

No. Allowing the loss of data during the action of *saving* the document
is bad design. 

-- 
E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my ravenous SPAM filter.
I often ignore posts from Google. Use a real news client instead.

JR

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#29369

From	nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid>
Date	2015-04-22 13:50 -0400
Message-ID	<220420151350552682%nospam@nospam.invalid>
In reply to	#29367

In article <cpq4egFt5tjU6@mid.individual.net>, Jolly Roger
<jollyroger@pobox.com> wrote:

> > But Save_As should give you the option to save as text (stripping all
> > formatting). I think earlier versions of textedit had that option.
> 
> No. Allowing the loss of data during the action of *saving* the document
> is bad design.

it's the user's choice. warn the user, and if they confirm, then that's
what they wanted to do.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#29374

From	Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com>
Date	2015-04-22 18:56 +0000
Message-ID	<cpq968FnpkU1@mid.individual.net>
In reply to	#29369

On 2015-04-22, nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> wrote:
> In article <cpq4egFt5tjU6@mid.individual.net>, Jolly Roger
><jollyroger@pobox.com> wrote:
>
>> > But Save_As should give you the option to save as text (stripping all
>> > formatting). I think earlier versions of textedit had that option.
>> 
>> No. Allowing the loss of data during the action of *saving* the document
>> is bad design.
>
> it's the user's choice. warn the user, and if they confirm, then that's
> what they wanted to do.

Sure, I have no problem with that.

-- 
E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my ravenous SPAM filter.
I often ignore posts from Google. Use a real news client instead.

JR

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#29370

From	JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca>
Date	2015-04-22 13:53 -0400
Message-ID	<5537e009$0$4730$b1db1813$46decd27@news.astraweb.com>
In reply to	#29367

On 15-04-22 13:35, Jolly Roger wrote:

> No. Allowing the loss of data during the action of *saving* the document
> is bad design. 

"All formating will be lost, agree ?" Dialogue does the trick.

The idea here is to make your own workflow more efficient.

If you want to see what stripping of formating will look like before
saving, then you change it in the editor. But if you don't care, you
should be allowed to SAVE AS and have formatting stripped quickly for
you (and leave the document in rich text so you can continue to edit etc)

Adding abilities to SAVE AS does not make the application worse. It adds
finctionality that some people need.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#29376

From	jamiekg@wizardling.geek.nz (Jamie Kahn Genet)
Date	2015-04-23 07:10 +1200
Message-ID	<1m3bkuu.1h2gjembauipgN%jamiekg@wizardling.geek.nz>
In reply to	#29370

JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> wrote:

> On 15-04-22 13:35, Jolly Roger wrote:
> 
> > No. Allowing the loss of data during the action of *saving* the document
> > is bad design. 
> 
> 
> "All formating will be lost, agree ?" Dialogue does the trick.
> 
> The idea here is to make your own workflow more efficient.
> 
> If you want to see what stripping of formating will look like before
> saving, then you change it in the editor. But if you don't care, you
> should be allowed to SAVE AS and have formatting stripped quickly for
> you (and leave the document in rich text so you can continue to edit etc)
> 
> 
> Adding abilities to SAVE AS does not make the application worse. It adds
> finctionality that some people need.

But what if I want to work with just plain text? Isn't it a bit odd in a
text editor - even a text editor/lightweight word processor - to have to
save into plain text just to be able to work in purely plain text (or
vice versa if one starts in plain text and wants to shift to rich text)?
Ok, maybe have a Save As plain text available regardless, but I do think
Apple's design choices in TextEdit have merit, and certainly don't lack
functionality just because of the way RTF<->Plain Text is handled.
-- 
If you're not part of the solution, you're part of the precipitate.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#29377

From	jamiekg@wizardling.geek.nz (Jamie Kahn Genet)
Date	2015-04-23 07:09 +1200
Message-ID	<1m3bkop.q7q7rrfsa7fxN%jamiekg@wizardling.geek.nz>
In reply to	#29365

JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> wrote:

> On 15-04-22 13:11, Jamie Kahn Genet wrote:
> 
> > Plus given the switch between RTF and plain text changes formatting
> > options available, as well as save options, it only makes sense to have
> > it be a menu option, instead of a 'Save As…' dialog option.
> 
> 
> But Save_As should give you the option to save as text (stripping all
> formatting). I think earlier versions of textedit had that option.

I've always though a Save As option that radically alters formatting and
content (in the case of plain text - completely stripping it and any
other embedded media out) is worthy of some kind of distinction, and
TextEdit handles that well IMO.
-- 
If you're not part of the solution, you're part of the precipitate.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#29393

From	JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca>
Date	2015-04-22 16:53 -0400
Message-ID	<55380a42$0$1606$c3e8da3$12bcf670@news.astraweb.com>
In reply to	#29377

On 15-04-22 15:09, Jamie Kahn Genet wrote:

> I've always though a Save As option that radically alters formatting and
> content (in the case of plain text - completely stripping it and any
> other embedded media out) is worthy of some kind of distinction, and
> TextEdit handles that well IMO.

Photoshop allows you to "SAVE AS" in a variety of formats, some of which
have lossy conpression, some which don't. In some cases, an extra dialog
pops up to choose options especially when it comes to losing photosop
information such as layers, or reducing colour schemes (GIF).

So, if you write a document in rich text, and choose SAVE AS, and
specify ASCII/TEXT as output, and get dialog to confirmn loss of
formatting, this is perfectly acceptable.

One of the reasons GUI caught on is that they offered fairly consistent
user interfaces that allows one used to survive across different
platforms such as Mac, X windows, Windows. "Save As" is part of an
industry standard for GUIs, and apple tried to do away with it,
replacing it with "Duplicate".

So when Apple strays from standard GUI interfaces, it is normal to
expect weird questiosn from people who come from other platforms. And
ironic that Apple is now the one whose user interface has become the
less intuitive one because it has strayed from standards.

Next, Jony Ive redesigns the keyboard with the rerturn key on the left
because it looks better that way ?

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#29403

From	jamiekg@wizardling.geek.nz (Jamie Kahn Genet)
Date	2015-04-23 10:42 +1200
Message-ID	<1m3bufj.t5iclf1qrh4u1N%jamiekg@wizardling.geek.nz>
In reply to	#29393

JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> wrote:

> On 15-04-22 15:09, Jamie Kahn Genet wrote:
> 
> > I've always though a Save As option that radically alters formatting and
> > content (in the case of plain text - completely stripping it and any
> > other embedded media out) is worthy of some kind of distinction, and
> > TextEdit handles that well IMO.
> 
> Photoshop allows you to "SAVE AS" in a variety of formats, some of which
> have lossy conpression, some which don't. In some cases, an extra dialog
> pops up to choose options especially when it comes to losing photosop
> information such as layers, or reducing colour schemes (GIF).
> 
> So, if you write a document in rich text, and choose SAVE AS, and
> specify ASCII/TEXT as output, and get dialog to confirmn loss of
> formatting, this is perfectly acceptable.
> 
> One of the reasons GUI caught on is that they offered fairly consistent
> user interfaces that allows one used to survive across different
> platforms such as Mac, X windows, Windows. "Save As" is part of an
> industry standard for GUIs, and apple tried to do away with it,
> replacing it with "Duplicate".
> 
> So when Apple strays from standard GUI interfaces, it is normal to
> expect weird questiosn from people who come from other platforms. And
> ironic that Apple is now the one whose user interface has become the
> less intuitive one because it has strayed from standards.
> 
> Next, Jony Ive redesigns the keyboard with the rerturn key on the left
> because it looks better that way ?

I'm all for consistent UI. That's why I still far prefer the classic
MacOS GUI to OS X's. Especially System 6 - which I consider the high
water point in intuitive, simple, clean, friendly GUI.

But that doesn't mean what has been done is always the best choice.
TextEdit is a bit of an odd duck - both plain text editor and rich text
word processor. Given that, it only makes sense to me to handle things a
bit differently.

Honestly - I'm not sure how anyone can fail to comprehend TextEdit. I
mean there is only a tiny number of menus and preferences, and any user
with a bit of sense will just try a few things on a test document to see
what they do, if they're truly stumped. Plus TextEdit's help clearly
explains the basics such as switching formats.

So in order to be as clueless as Alan, one must:
a) Not look through the menus and preferences, of which there are only a
few.
b) Not try anything to see what happens, and there is very little to
try.
c) Not read the help file available right there from the Help menu.

I also note Alan seemed to think in several posts that changing the file
extension would change the file type. This makes it even harder for me
to believe he's even an experienced Unix user, as he claims.

-- 
If you're not part of the solution, you're part of the precipitate.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#29404

From	Alan Baker <email@domain.com>
Date	2015-04-22 15:52 -0700
Message-ID	<mh98nn$vmu$2@news.datemas.de>
In reply to	#29403

On 2015-04-22 22:42:31 +0000, Jamie Kahn Genet said:

> JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> wrote:
> 
>> On 15-04-22 15:09, Jamie Kahn Genet wrote:
>> 
>>> I've always though a Save As option that radically alters formatting and
>>> content (in the case of plain text - completely stripping it and any
>>> other embedded media out) is worthy of some kind of distinction, and
>>> TextEdit handles that well IMO.
>> 
>> Photoshop allows you to "SAVE AS" in a variety of formats, some of which
>> have lossy conpression, some which don't. In some cases, an extra dialog
>> pops up to choose options especially when it comes to losing photosop
>> information such as layers, or reducing colour schemes (GIF).
>> 
>> So, if you write a document in rich text, and choose SAVE AS, and
>> specify ASCII/TEXT as output, and get dialog to confirmn loss of
>> formatting, this is perfectly acceptable.
>> 
>> One of the reasons GUI caught on is that they offered fairly consistent
>> user interfaces that allows one used to survive across different
>> platforms such as Mac, X windows, Windows. "Save As" is part of an
>> industry standard for GUIs, and apple tried to do away with it,
>> replacing it with "Duplicate".
>> 
>> So when Apple strays from standard GUI interfaces, it is normal to
>> expect weird questiosn from people who come from other platforms. And
>> ironic that Apple is now the one whose user interface has become the
>> less intuitive one because it has strayed from standards.
>> 
>> Next, Jony Ive redesigns the keyboard with the rerturn key on the left
>> because it looks better that way ?
> 
> I'm all for consistent UI. That's why I still far prefer the classic
> MacOS GUI to OS X's. Especially System 6 - which I consider the high
> water point in intuitive, simple, clean, friendly GUI.
> 
> But that doesn't mean what has been done is always the best choice.
> TextEdit is a bit of an odd duck - both plain text editor and rich text
> word processor. Given that, it only makes sense to me to handle things a
> bit differently.
> 
> Honestly - I'm not sure how anyone can fail to comprehend TextEdit. I
> mean there is only a tiny number of menus and preferences, and any user
> with a bit of sense will just try a few things on a test document to see
> what they do, if they're truly stumped. Plus TextEdit's help clearly
> explains the basics such as switching formats.
> 
> So in order to be as clueless as Alan, one must:
> a) Not look through the menus and preferences, of which there are only a
> few.
> b) Not try anything to see what happens, and there is very little to
> try.
> c) Not read the help file available right there from the Help menu.
> 
> I also note Alan seemed to think in several posts that changing the file
> extension would change the file type. This makes it even harder for me
> to believe he's even an experienced Unix user, as he claims.

Please...

"Adam", not "Alan"

:-)

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#29408

From	jamiekg@wizardling.geek.nz (Jamie Kahn Genet)
Date	2015-04-23 11:03 +1200
Message-ID	<1m3bw1e.1gsvx8vvegvxvN%jamiekg@wizardling.geek.nz>
In reply to	#29404

Alan Baker <email@domain.com> wrote:

> On 2015-04-22 22:42:31 +0000, Jamie Kahn Genet said:
> 
> > JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> wrote:
> > 
> >> On 15-04-22 15:09, Jamie Kahn Genet wrote:
> >> 
> >>> I've always though a Save As option that radically alters formatting and
> >>> content (in the case of plain text - completely stripping it and any
> >>> other embedded media out) is worthy of some kind of distinction, and
> >>> TextEdit handles that well IMO.
> >> 
> >> Photoshop allows you to "SAVE AS" in a variety of formats, some of which
> >> have lossy conpression, some which don't. In some cases, an extra dialog
> >> pops up to choose options especially when it comes to losing photosop
> >> information such as layers, or reducing colour schemes (GIF).
> >> 
> >> So, if you write a document in rich text, and choose SAVE AS, and
> >> specify ASCII/TEXT as output, and get dialog to confirmn loss of
> >> formatting, this is perfectly acceptable.
> >> 
> >> One of the reasons GUI caught on is that they offered fairly consistent
> >> user interfaces that allows one used to survive across different
> >> platforms such as Mac, X windows, Windows. "Save As" is part of an
> >> industry standard for GUIs, and apple tried to do away with it,
> >> replacing it with "Duplicate".
> >> 
> >> So when Apple strays from standard GUI interfaces, it is normal to
> >> expect weird questiosn from people who come from other platforms. And
> >> ironic that Apple is now the one whose user interface has become the
> >> less intuitive one because it has strayed from standards.
> >> 
> >> Next, Jony Ive redesigns the keyboard with the rerturn key on the left
> >> because it looks better that way ?
> > 
> > I'm all for consistent UI. That's why I still far prefer the classic
> > MacOS GUI to OS X's. Especially System 6 - which I consider the high
> > water point in intuitive, simple, clean, friendly GUI.
> > 
> > But that doesn't mean what has been done is always the best choice.
> > TextEdit is a bit of an odd duck - both plain text editor and rich text
> > word processor. Given that, it only makes sense to me to handle things a
> > bit differently.
> > 
> > Honestly - I'm not sure how anyone can fail to comprehend TextEdit. I
> > mean there is only a tiny number of menus and preferences, and any user
> > with a bit of sense will just try a few things on a test document to see
> > what they do, if they're truly stumped. Plus TextEdit's help clearly
> > explains the basics such as switching formats.
> > 
> > So in order to be as clueless as Alan, one must:
> > a) Not look through the menus and preferences, of which there are only a
> > few.
> > b) Not try anything to see what happens, and there is very little to
> > try.
> > c) Not read the help file available right there from the Help menu.
> > 
> > I also note Alan seemed to think in several posts that changing the file
> > extension would change the file type. This makes it even harder for me
> > to believe he's even an experienced Unix user, as he claims.
> 
> Please...
> 
> "Adam", not "Alan"
> 
> :-)

Was it? Sorry mate. His stupidity is already fading into the mists of
the past :-)
-- 
If you're not part of the solution, you're part of the precipitate.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#29409

From	Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com>
Date	2015-04-22 23:35 +0000
Message-ID	<cpqpi2F3ijcU5@mid.individual.net>
In reply to	#29408

On 2015-04-22, Jamie Kahn Genet <jamiekg@wizardling.geek.nz> wrote:
> Alan Baker <email@domain.com> wrote:
>
>> Please...
>> 
>> "Adam", not "Alan"
>> 
>> :-)
>
> Was it? Sorry mate. His stupidity is already fading into the mists of
> the past :-)

I knew who you meant, if it's any consolation. : D

-- 
E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my ravenous SPAM filter.
I often ignore posts from Google. Use a real news client instead.

JR

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

Page 12 of 20 — ← Prev page 1 … 10 11 [12] 13 14 … 20 Next page →

csiph-web

How do mac users create a blank text file where you want it?

Contents

#29394

#29346

#29347

#29349

#29352

#29355

#29353

#29361

#29365

#29367

#29369

#29374

#29370

#29376

#29377

#29393

#29403

#29404

#29408

#29409