best text editor was killed by Borland

[noespam]

I just have to say the best text editor is no longer around.

The best windows text editor was CodeWright. It had features that current text editors are now starting to implement and some which I have yet to see in the so-called best editors of today like a smart code template system. Codewright's expandability was second to none. Unfortunately, Borland bought the company and killed Codewright with it just as they did with DOS Brief. Borland killed the best DOS and Windows editor. The programming gods didn't like that. Look at Borland now.

[wraith808]

For something dead, it sure is kicking around...

Amazon: http://www.amazon.co...173628486&sr=1-1

Digital river Borland shop:
http://www.digitalri...GRP=0&CACHE_ID=0

It's very expensive though...

[Darwin]

Hmm... I took the OP's comments to mean that the product has been degraded in terms of quality/stability/features in versions released since the takeover. Similar arguments have been made about PaintShop Pro and other products that have been taken over by Corel. The venture capitalists that bought Corel are on a buying spree - they've recently acquired Winzip, Intervideo (WinDVD and WinDVD Creator), Ulead (PhotoImpact), etc. But I digress.

[wraith808]

As far as I can tell, it hasn't been degraded.  Left in the wind with no updates, yes... but as I state in another thread, I still use Multi-Edit 8 because it had all of the features that I wanted.  Too many times, I think, good software becomes bloat ware because too much gets added to it- companies don't know when to stop.  IMO Delphi is a good example of this- they tried to become Visual Studio, and now the new versions are bloated, and take forever to compile.

[Darwin]

wraith808 - I can't argue with any of that! I hate bloatware (though I confess I use more than my share)...

[iphigenie]

Well i can sympathize with developers.

People ask for features. All the time. If you don't add any, you start losing users. You get criticized for not listening, not developing the products. People start worrying that since it hasnt had an update in a year the product is dead. (heck we do it here sometimes "no update since 2005, oh well, lets look for another product" when it could actually be that it does all it needs to do with no major known bugs and why mess with it?)

So you try to add the ones that a lot of people ask for, the ones that make sense to you, the ones that are easy to add, the ones reviewers keep bringing up as missing from your product in comparative reviews.

And then one day you wake up realising that the tool no longer does its primary function as fast and comfortably as it used to.

It's a fine line.

[wraith808]

Oh, as a developer, I understand.  I think that you have to have a roadmap, and don't integrate suggestions unless they are a part of that roadmap.  Sure, X may be a good idea, but is it along your primary purpose for the app?  Is it a logical upgrade?  Or is it just something that will be good to have?

If you set out to make a simple text editor, just to edit text... and a user complains about lack of FTP capability, is that part of your mission statement?  Sometimes, you have to just direct users to an app that will satisfy what they need- because your app doesn't serve their purpose.

But, of course, money is an overriding factor, and noone wants to lose a paying customer...

[mitzevo]

Well I just have to say there are still many best text editors available and kicking strong *cough*Editpad Pro*cough*.. Well for me any way I'm sure other's will agree to a degree of my nonsense.

[peter.s]

My original post from the SlickEdit thread, transferred here:

But I'm very sorry, again I'll have another aspect to mention. SlickEdit is an expensive editor that is deemed to be a replacement for the also high-priced (and high-praised) CodeWright (which is not further developed, but not "defunct" either, and which is deemed the very best editor there ever has been), so the "original", the "real thing", here, would be CW, not SE.

That's why I contacted CW, in order to get a trial (all relevant links to CW trials are dead), OR to get a help file, at least, in order to see for myself (and if I was willing to spend 300 bucks plus VAT).

They (CW) very kindly told me there wasn't any trial, but they would be happy to sell me the application (and no mention of a help file).

So now this is really gross (from CW), and I don't consider buying some mythic sw, just by hearsay, but then, I'm not willing to buy the "replacement" either, especially since I would never lose that nagging feeling that I would have been so much better off by buying the "original", the "real thing". (I even considered buying CW (! not SE!) in spite of their attitude. which says it all.)

Thus, at the end of the day, I have to cope with my TSE, KEdit, and emEditor (for which I own a lifetime license (bought for a pittance, the last day that "lifetime" was available at the regular price: compare with today...), which is under constant development, and they are nice people.

But then, I really wonder if I should have bought CW, anyway - whilst SE is just good and expensive, but nothing extraordinary.

Just my 2 cents. (And yes, I trialled SE before making that statement.)

AND NOW EDIT:

I looked into their sales page, in order to check if, considering the outdated character of that software, they had perhaps lowered the price (they had asked 299 euro in 2013, the "official" price was 299$ then):

https://store.embarc...y.USD/?id=uSesrV9cXY

= now it's 458.98$ plus VAT, = 546.19$, now this is outrageous...

All the more so since that very old 7.5 version gets really old, have a look here, for a little regex comparison of some editors:

http://www.zeusedit....mp;highlight=folding (second post there, by noman9607)

Very instructive, as far as I'm concerned...

EDIT:

Ok, later on in that linked thread, there's another link, to

http://swtch.com/~rs.../regexp/regexp1.html

and which is the real find here...

Well, trying to cope with Friedl's classic, for the time being...

[Jussi Jumppanen]

have a look here, for a little regex comparison of some editors:

I'm the author of the Zeus editor referenced on that page and I just read that link again. Brings back memories

To this day I'm not really sure what noman9607 meant when he wrote this:

Boxer and EmEdit have full PCRE and .NET capable regex engines respectively.
..
If Zeus would upgrade to modern regex standards I could do the same with zeus.

As far as I can remember, the Zeus of that vintage had the same regexp engine it has today (be it the current engine has had a few updates since) and that engine is PCRE

Unfortunately he never posted an example of the regexp that was giving him trouble, so it's hard to know exactly what was causing the issue

[Tuxman]

Borland killed Sublime Text?
(Not having read the thread.)