![]() ![]() Sure, there would be harder things to improve I'm sure, but I don't see why it's a contest at all. I in no way think that improving Notepad would be one of the easiest changes to make to Windows. With its large host of weird bugs I would not expect the current codebase to be simple to update, and surely you'd agree a rewrite of Notepad is more than a few days. It does weird things when saving files, like moving your cursor to another location, so if you are typing and saving and typing and saving you will end up with text misplaced all over and a bizarre file that has a weird back/undo history. I hope we can agree on that.įor example, Notepad has been one of the buggiest and weirdest pieces of software I used on stock Windows. > It's probably one of the simplest changes you can make to Windows. ![]() Notepad2 was better on the UI last time I used it, but still took longer to load. On the other hand, Notepad++ takes much longer to load, has more UI elements, and generally makes it harder to do the one very simple thing I want it to do - allow me to create and edit plaintext. ![]() Heck, if I need a DOS batch file, I turn to either Notepad or Edit. I prewrite emails, cover letters, and long forum posts in Notepad. I've written entire websites in Notepad, not to mention it being my go-to writing tool for anything that doesn't need to be visually impressive or which I can add formatting tags to. I'm really lost as to why anyone says Notepad is not a good text editor for basic text. Users can set display and print fonts, etc. It loads fast and can handle files of decent size without lag. I'm sorry for going off topic, but I keep seeing this kind of comment and I want to get an answer - how is Notepad not a good editor? It can take any ASCII/ANSI/UTF file and output it in plaintext. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |