I automatically bought Nova (cue fainting) when it came out because Panic has provided me with a lot of value over the years (yes, I paid for an FTP client, too).
I still use VS Code the most, but I don't enjoy tinkering with endlessly customizable tools to get the perfect environment. I like an opinionated tool that has a solid handful of niceties, and doesn't abdicate features to a bazaar of plugins. Nova's good like that, but I miss Espresso, which I consider even more Mac-like for being a little offbeat but also had some genuine innovations like a GUI for CSS attributes. It hasn't been updated in several years, but I'm trying it again to see if it works better for the kids (learning web design) than Nova.
I think the Mac App Store has been a terrible distribution system for indie devs... I never even think of going there for apps, nor do the non-technical folks I know.
The iOS App store is a monopoly that is breaking down in Europe. I expect the landscape will continue to evolve globally and it will fall in other markets as well.
>I think the Mac App Store has been a terrible distribution system for indie devs... I never even think of going there for apps, nor do the non-technical folks I know.
Not sure what you mean. Everyone I know with a Mac gets their stuff from MAS and brew, only if forced go to some separate installer, like Adobe shit and specialized apps. From hardcore system programmers to graphic designers to home users...
Now everything is being written in Electron because "shipping" has become culturally the most important thing. This is a whole misunderstanding of human happiness. We don't need anything beyond food and shelter. Don't need banks, VCs, markets and Slack. So we should focus on tinkering and making quality stuff again instead otherwise there is really no need to do anything.
As someone who’s done a fair bit of native macOS development. I’d say modern Apple is also at least partially to blame by their lack of understanding for macOS and seeming disdain for it. SwiftUI 5 years later is still full of issues on mac and missing a lot of the things AppKit provided for free that made mac apps mac apps. A SwiftUI app on mac doesn’t feel like a mac app in the way people are nostalgic for. While on iOS it chips away at UIKit every year.
I’m definitely not a macOS developer, but I’ve been a Mac user longer than most (back when it was called “system”). What makes a “Mac app” feel like one has always been a constant evolution. Even in what I’d nostalgically consider the highest points in Mac experience.
While SwiftUI apps do feel different from what came before, the underlying UX feels different too. A SwiftUI app intentionally built for macOS isn’t nearly as disjoint an experience as say Catalyst, let alone Electron. And given how much the non-native experience has taken hold, there’s no reason a new baseline native experience couldn’t be established. The reason it won’t isn’t because of any specific technology, it’s largely because there’s basically no market for a rich native app ecosystem as that baseline. The entire economy of desktop software is stagnant.
I do wonder if desktop as a use case becoming even more niche than it already has could see that trend start to reverse. It would be a smaller market, but that’s exactly how the older macOS experience thrived.
Yeah absolutely. I’ve also noticed a lot of random AttributeGraph crashes showing up in our monitoring for macOS and not for iOS despite iOS having far more active users.
Doing my SwiftUI dev for mac on a crappy little Intel 13" MBP feels like doing modern web dev while throttling down to 3g network. I notice things I might not otherwise notice on the M series chips with a ton of ram, like super laggy and buggy NavigationSplitView selection, laughably slow Settings app pane switching, etc..
Swift Charts actually seems pretty good so far, but the basics fall somewhere between chonky and just ok.
Electron feels odd compared to native applications, and resource usage is pretty insane. A single Electron app takes more memory than everything running in my machine, including an X server, PipeWire, plus an Emacs and an XTerm instance. Well done native applications are really refreshing, and they don't spin my computer fans all the time.
Macs had a very healthy boutique and indie app scene at some point, with lots of attention to detail, because users were happy to pay for good quality software. The Omni Group, Panic, Cultured Code, etc. all delivered outstanding things. GNOME 2 was pretty nice too in its own ways. After a lot of churn and changes, it is again re-emerging as a noteworthy desktop ecosystem. See https://apps.gnome.org.
(Although I think the program still needs a bit of time to smooth out the edges, plus not everyone may be a fan of the AI and collaborative features, which get a lot of care in the GUI. You can turn all of it off, but still.)
But I don't like the implication that Nova is abandoned or less modern compared to Zed. Nova is arguably one of the sexiest apps on the Mac right now – it looks gorgeous and it's far more "Mac-assed" than any of Apple's software, for starters. And in terms of development / maintenance, it should be in VERY good hands at Panic.
You're 100% right on open-source vs closed-source, though.
> Nova is arguably one of the sexiest apps on the Mac right now – it looks gorgeous and it's far more "Mac-assed" than any of Apple's software, for starters.
Really? Looking at the screenshots from the front page it looks like a custom GUI framework and doesn't even look like a native macOS app, even the folder icons in the file tree are wrong. The only way I can tell it's a macOS app is by the traffic lights on the top left.
You're not wrong, the frontpage screenshots don't entirely do it justice. That title bar you mention is one of the most custom-looking components for sure, especially in the "Neon" theme.
But it gets better when clicking around the app – all the different settings, modal sheets and sidebars feel very much like home.
The filetree icons are… a choice, yes. They kind of lean more into the "smooth skeumorphic squircle" look which is normally applied to apps, NOT files and folders. I'm guessing they didn't want to and/or weren't allowed to use the plain icons that Xcode does.
I use zed but I had to switch to the preview because the regular has an awful bug where the fuzzy file finder immediately crashes the app. I thought there would be less of this in Rust.
I tried to make it work for me working with Rails and could never achieve anything close to the productivity I get with RubyMine. I understand these two products are in completely different leagues, but I thought it might be interesting to try the native alternative... It just was never really viable for me to work with... even for simple quick editing, the load time is to much compared to any slimer editor... I was happy to contribute with a licence for a native product, since I believe in that, so no loss really...
I really wanted to like this editor, but it chugs while working with 10,000+ file projects. It also seems to index all the files each time the project is relaunched.
Sublime runs flawlessly working with this same codebase...
Happy Nova user here. I use it for our embedded C Code. I use the SeaDragon plugin with it. I was pretty frustrated trying to figure out how to configure VSCode to work with our toolchains, and I didn’t want to learn CMake just so I could use CLion. We had been using the free version of QT IDE, but that got less and less useful/available.
There's a portion of the web world that values this sort of tool immensely. Nova (like its predecessor Coda) is focused on a certain subset of web development workflows.
I'm sure VSCode and others can be configured or extended to come close to the experience, but 100$ for something well-made that fits your workflow out of the box is a pretty great deal for a professional.
If they were aiming to please web developers, they took a wrong approach. Their syntax highlighter by design is incompatible in its approach to parsing CSS to be able to syntax highlight it correctly, and this was pointed out to them early on and they just hacked something broken together. It didn't appear to be a serious attempt to support web languages.
First word of the headline – it works and feels native to the platform. JetBrains and especially VS Code don’t respect the conventions of macOS software, visually as well as functionally.
On this note, do you have any notes or resources on what makes a MacOS app "native"? It's a quality people discuss but I can't identify.
I used MacOS briefly 2000-2004, and then got a Macbook in 2022. Even among Apple's built-in apps, I can't identify why they would be considered "native".
For example, Apple's Music app is surely "native", but does not appear to use the DEs default elements, and performs like an electron app might.
One would also expect Applescript / Automator (Apple's built-in macro tool, a-la AutoHotkey / xdotool) to work with native apps, but it doesn't work on ARM Macbooks.
Compared to Linux, I think anyone with no experience in it could sort native GTK vs native Qt vs native xMotif applications. But I think "native" as a quality is more of a dependency management and consistency question.
The only thing I can recognize from Panic's screenshots that appear "native" is the Preferences page, in the older "grid on a shelf" format. (edit) And the "install applications by dragging to the Applications" folder workflow, which I appreciate very much.
All this is to ask, what does "works and feels native" mean and what makes it desirable?
1) Does it look native at a pixel level? In other words, does it use a standard Mac window and title bar and buttons and widgets and all the rest?
2) Is it organized according to Mac UX conventions? Does it put commands in the menu bar rather than inside of windows? Are menu items where you'd expect? Is the "Settings..." command where you'd expect, and is the Settings dialog laid out in standard tabs or icons across the top, rather than something else (like a list box on the left)?
3) Does it respect all standard gestures and shortcuts and animations? If I press opt+left in a textbox, will the cursor jump to the previous word? If I press cmd+right, will it jump to the end of the text? If I scroll down, will it bounce at the bottom?
That's what it means. And it's desirable for 1) aesthetics, 2) understandability, and 3) usability directly corresponding to those three points. Aesthetics is less important but it's still nice. Understandability is important because I don't want to hunt for a command when it's not where I'd expect. And usability is critical because when I cmd+right in a text box and it doesn't work, it's incredibly frustrating.
Obviously, "native" is not a binary but is rather a continuum. And yes, even Apple's own apps are not always 100% at the "native" end, especially with stuff they've designed in conjunction with iOS. Which I think a lot of Mac users find frustrating.
Greatly put, thank you so much. We should put this up somewhere as the Mac-assed manifesto.
But I would actually add, on a more fundamental level:
0) Does it actually run on my metal? I.e. not in a VM, not any sort of "thin client", and CERTAINLY not Electron… but rather an actual solid piece of software compiled for the computer it's running on?
You say "native is not a binary" but actually, in my opinion yes, it is also very much the binary!
"is the Settings dialog laid out in standard tabs or icons across the top, rather than something else (like a list box on the left)?"
Or worse, a huge plain old JSON with tons of multi line comments explaining what one particular key does.
Like, I get it, its l33t and haxx0r to use a text file for settings, and yeah, you can easily transfer it to other platforms unlike an XML Plist file, but I despise apps that don't even bother providing a basic UI for changing settings. Ctrl+F "autocomplete" (30 results) is a *terrible* experience vs a natively drawn "Autocomplete" tab in a settings modal.
"One would also expect Applescript / Automator (Apple's built-in macro tool, a-la AutoHotkey / xdotool) to work with native apps, but it doesn't work on ARM Macbooks."
This is completely false, I use Automator, Applescript, and Folder Actions near daily on my Apple Silicon Macs.
I have my Automations and Applescripts fail regularly, and I saw it discussed as one of the things Apple stopped maintaining after the move to ARM. In my experience, it doesn't work. (Of course, I can't compare to how well it worked on x86...)
I think you might want to double check that. I only moved to macOS after the M1 launched, and all of my automations and AppleScripts work just fine with no issues.
Brent Simmons used the term "Mac-assed Mac app" for apps that are un-apologetically MAC apps, and not just x-platform builds of something else with no regard for the OS.
First, I wish there was a resource but there isn't. This kind of just lives on as bits of folklore among users and devs. You'd think Apple's guidelines was a place to start, but honestly not really.
The sibling comments gave some great answers and especially `crazygringo` summarized pretty much exactly what I was gonna say, so I'm not gonna go into detail.
But I just wanna add: "Mac-assedness" totally includes of some strict, non-negotiable rules, but it also involves lots of loose, abstract "vibes" where even if your app isn't exactly guideline on paper, it just feels right in spirit and paradoxically, by being more custom, the app comes out more native in the end. This takes a certain personal taste to pull off as a developer. And it is the opposite of design by committee.
Excellent points above, for me personally the "Shared Find pasteboard" has been a huge productivity boost.
Everyone's aware of the normal clipboard: select some text, press ^C (⌘C on Mac) to copy and ^V (⌘V on Mac) to paste it. It's system-wide, so you can copy in one app and paste in a different one (or several).
On Mac, there is a similar pasteboard (or "clipboard") for search strings. Select text, select "Use Selection for Find" or press ⌘E (this sends it into shared find pasteboard, overwriting its contents), and ⌘G to "Find Next" occurrence of that string, or ⇧⌘G to "Find Previous".
The shared find pasteboard is also system-wide, you can use ⌘E in one app and ⌘G/⇧⌘G in another app. When you use ⌘F to "Find ...", it is expected to already open up populated with the contents of the shared find pasteboard.
The majority of the cross-platform apps are lacking this feature, since they are designed to a lowest common denominator (which does not have the shared find pasteboard). On VS Code you'd find yourself doing ^C/^F/^V followed by several "Enter" keys, while overwriting whatever you've had on your clipboard and also polluting your clipboard history.
I hope all that explains how I'm stuck with iTerm2, Safari, Mail, and TextMate. I'd pay for a native Slack client (the Electron abomination uses ⌘F to "Find" and ⌘G to "Search" while lacking ⌘E completely) but sadly they don't make it.
> For example, Apple's Music app is surely "native", but does not appear to use the DEs default elements, and performs like an electron app might.
For the grey beards of MacOS:
This guy trashes the HIG [Apple Human Interface Guide] the way Johnny Depp trashes a hotel room. He even sports a custom radius on his window corners. No other window on the system has a shape like this. It’s wild. Just wait until the HIG zealots get a load of this guy.
Apple that follow the HIG [0] closely are normally considered "mac native" (though I don't like the word "native" here as I normally use it to differentiate between electron/native).
As an apple fan, Music is disgusting on every platform. It is possible to be technically native but also very bad. For a text editor it is also true but where entry speed matters being a web based monster like VS studio is a downside. You may not notice delay consciously but it takes its toll
It seems like it would be so easy to not suck though. I think a lot of the problems stem from the Music app really wanting to be a streaming app, and not a way to organize your own music.
I'm gonna bite on this example since you chose such a good one: if the convention on the platform is that `Page` buttons are like scrolling – NOT like arrowing – then good applications should respect that convention.
You personally list this particular (mis)behavior as a "plus" since you like the PC convention better. But another person will think the opposite. Objectively, it's simply just inconsistent.
What we need is "good platform citizen" apps which respect the local conventions, and you as the user get to choose the platform with its set of conventions you prefer.
What we DON'T need is apps "unifying" behavior across operating systems based on their own opinion of what's better, ultimately just creating more mess.
Many of us on the Mac are there in part because the environment and conventions make more sense to us than the conventions on other platforms. X-platform apps typically ignore this.
However for keyboard shortcuts said conventions are defined for crippled keyboards without dedicated navigation keys and the extension for PgUp/Down is simply inefficient when programming.
The cursor movement conventions have existed in macos since the classic mac days, when Apple was routinely shipping keyboards with "dedicated navigation keys":
Up / Down: move cursor one line up or down
Left / Right: move cursor one character left or right
Option+
Up / Down: Move cursor up or down a whole paragraph
Left / Right: move cursor left or right a whole word
Command+
Up / Down: Move cursor to the beginning of the document
Left / Right: Move cursor to the beginning or end of the document
Page Up / Page Down: Move the scrolled display area up or down a "page" without moving the cursor
Home / End: Move the scrolled display area to the beginning or end of the document
The latter two are nice to have because it means you can scroll up through a window to view something, and start typing to have your view snap back to your cursor position.
Additionally at least as far back as the Powerbook G3 "Wallstreet" in 1998, and including the iBook lines from the same time period, to the best of my knowledge every Apple portable since (as well as any wireless/compact keyboards with Fn keys) then has supported Fn + Left/Right for Home/End respectively and Fn + Up/Down for Page Up / Page Down respectively. They were even marked as such through the early non-unibody MBPs but continue to function that way today even without the markings. While these aren't dedicated keys, they're convenient enough in combination with the other modifiers that you'd be using to move the cursor that I don't personally consider it a significant difference.
I think there's a somewhat obvious middle ground here: use the platform's default behavior, and surface an option that lets a user decide if they prefer the other version; eg: a PC user should also have the option to treat the page keys as scroll inputs rather than cursor navigation.
Answer to your Answer: Then its on the application developer to give you the option to override the platform convention, but well behaved apps should adhere to the conventions of their platform by default.
No, you don’t get to decide that. Myself and many others have decided they liked this unified behavior just fine, while still preferring to code on macOS.
It’s Mac only, which means it follows the Mac UI conventions and is probably, should run faster and is integrated into the OS a little better.
I’m paying for jetbrains now. I’m on Linux but it’s clearly a non-native application, which has some issues. Actually it integrates really well considering. I can run in any os and it’s the same. I tried eclipse (free), but the experience wasnt good and it was worth buying jetbrains software. This probably has a quite polished experience.
Panic also made transmit, which was my goto file transfer solution for a long time and a really decent piece of software.
I haven't used JetBrains but when I looked at editors a few years ago VSCode had an awful bug where if you had a Mac with a 4K external monitor it would flicker every time you typed a letter. It made VSCode functionally unusable for me. I use VSCode part time and overall find it less intuitive than the Nova UI/UX. Plus every time I have a problem Mike from Panic responds fairly promptly, and they've been responsive to some feature requests for things like debugging node inside Docker containers.
I like the UI more. It's native and feels snappier. But I don't use it as my main code editor - rather just as a text editor. I also edit markdown for my website with it. And do light PHP development with it (essentially just a few scripts).
I don't know if I would use Nova to actually develop anything more serious. Haven't looked to deep into it and I like my devtools to be opensource or at least have the feeling of them being maintained for very long. (Text editors tend to die very often).
Nope. I use Rider on Mac and Windows and it's better than Visual Studio on Windows in almost every way it's different. I've used Pycharm and Datagrip extensively on Mac and Windows as well, they're excellent tools. I haven't used Webstorm much though.
I normally think of code editors in one of 3 categories:
1. Plain text editors that can be extended and turned into semi-IDE/IDEs. This includes tools like VS Code or Sublime Text.
2. Opinionated editors with some type of extensions/plugins (normally more limited that the other 2 sections). This includes tools like Coda or Nova.
3. Full IDEs with extensive extension support. This includes tools like JetBrains, Eclipse, etc.
I prefer #3 but have used all 3 at different parts of my career. Started with Notepad++ then moved on to Coda, then Sublime, then Idea. Coda was really nice and I'm sure Nova is too if your needs are met by it. Meaning if you don't need support for anything outside of the core offerings or extensions available. Once you do need more then you have to either jump to 1 and build it yourself or jump to 3 and get most of it out of the box. #1 can be incredibly powerful if you are willing to put in the time and effort to set it up and keep it updated. Personally I want more "out of the box" than #1 and I'm very happy with the extensions/plugins available to me.
Another observation I have is that #1 is going to be the most cutting edge followed by #3 with #2 bringing up the rear (largely due to market share). #2 can be an amazing place to be if what you are writing is well supported but if you need to step outside of the "happy path" you are going to have a rough time whereas #1/#3 can handle that without issue.
Lastly, I will probably end up buying Nova at some point just to support Panic. I own a lot of their software (I use Transmit for pretty much all my file transfer needs) and their level of polish is unrivaled in the space they compete in. Their software always puts a smile on my face. Something that a lot of people don't seem to know is they are also the company behind the games Firewatch [0] and Untitled Goose Game [1] as well the Playdate [2]. They are a really cool company.
This has been my white whale for a bit as I do full-stack development where I’m managing multiple code projects across multiple machines. I have been looking for a VSC replacement as I would prefer another editor. The TL;DR is no, there is no VSC replacement currently.
Emacs has TRAMP+plugins but plugin support is iffy in my experience. Both Emacs and vim work great over terminal, but then you’re using a terminal editor and all that comes with, and you have to copy your settings and configurations to every new machine. I still use Emacs sometimes but prefer a GUI nowadays.
Zed has a remote edit feature in alpha but it relies on sending code to externally hosted servers which is against my company’s policy.
Nova has editing over SFTP but I tried Nova out for a day and found it to be really lacking. SFTP is very slow to edit and many plugins didn’t work with it. Overall language support is quite bad for non-web languages which doesn’t work for me as I regularly write in a bunch of languages.
Sublime Text has several SFTP edit plugins but they are usually paid, and didn’t look appealing enough to me to purchase, so I can’t say yet if they work.
I just straight up couldn’t get Pycharm/IntelliJ’s remote edit feature to work. I honestly think there must have been some network/firewall issue at my company because it would seemingly start up and then just never connect. This makes no sense if it is using SSH in the backend because other SSH programs work, but still debugging…
VSC is buggy, uses lots of RAM, sucks battery life, and is owned by shitty Microsoft. But for me it really is the best tool for the job. I’m optimistic about Zed.
I find the colors in the screenshots to be really odd. I find them to be very cartoonish and garish. That alone would probably keep me from considering it.
Checking out multiple code editors takes time. Optimizing $99 purchases is sub-optimal for many people. Particularly in the context of professional software development.
Finding free stuff can be a fun hobby. There's nothing wrong with using free time in that pursuit. Other people make different choices.
> You are editing text. If you rely on a paid product to do so then prepare to be a laughingstock when the license changes in a way you disagree with.
You are caring too much about what other people think. If someone laughs at me because of a tool I use, they're the tool
I pay for a JetBrains subscription. They're worth the money, imo. I've paid for Panic software in the past and did not regret it. I'm still pretty happy with my mix of Sublime Text 3, vim, and JetBrains, but if I get bored one day, I might check out Nova
Once again I find myself flabbergasted at working in an industry where the people working in that industry have no interest in getting paid for the work they do. You can spend $100 these days just eating dinner at a mid-tier restaurant. Quibbling over $100 for the software that makes your life / job easier is just crazy to me.
> If you rely on a paid product to do so then prepare to be a laughingstock when the license changes in a way you disagree with.
Haven't we seen multiple times in the past couple years when "free" products that people rely on have also changed their licenses in ways that people disagree with?
how can you extract $99 worth of value out of an IDE that would not be a loss for not using another free option? I expect to extract thousands of dollars worth of an IDE, at least, monthly.
You must not remember when most of the good text editors were paid (SlickEdit, KomodoEdit, etc). To this day, there are still editors that are worth their dollars: SourceInsight, SlickEdit.
Additionally, a lot of Good software on macOS is paid -- There's much more of a culture of paying your fucking developers on MacOS, whereas Windows is shoveled full of "It's free take it" apps that are under the hood paid for through data collection.
I still brush elbows with people that pay for Sublime Text and Git Tower, I just look down on their judgement as an individual. We don't live in an era where you have to pay for IDEs or compilers or even OSes anymore. Frivolous and vain spending like that absolutely reflects the sort of user you are and many (famously opinionated) developers will judge you for it accordingly. It's like driving a $150,000 supercar to work, you look like a tool and everyone knows it.
> There's much more of a culture of paying your fucking developers on MacOS
No, not really. It's more that Mac users are famously price-insensitive, and since Apple deliberately neglects cross-platform APIs they can create a captive userbase of desperate and moneyed software customers. It's a culture of exploitation on either side, as Apple makes so abundantly clear with their desperate clawing at the iOS market and the right to process payment for thousands of microtransactions a second.
> whereas Windows is shoveled full of "It's free take it" apps that are under the hood paid for through data collection.
MacOS is replete with those too, and many of them will charge you a monthly fee and steal your data. I think Windows is a fucking deralict operating system for the record, but modern MacOS is almost just as terrible and it's honestly hillarious watching people try to deny it. Yeah, you think Apple's fostering a "pay the developers" culture, huh? I don't see much kool-aid left in your styrofoam cup.
I’m a happy paid up user of Sublime, it’s gotten me through my PhD, and I’ve earned my livelihood with it for many years. The motivation to switch to something else because it’s free (either as in beer, or just maintained by volunteers as long as it’s the current cool thing) for me is nonexistent.
I can’t take your comparison between spending $99 on something that helps me earn many many times that, and $150k on a car seriously I’m afraid.
The comparison to a "$150k sports car" is crazy -- a Sports Car can be a flashy way to display wealth. No one is displaying wealth by having once paid for a Sublime License.
No one is sliding up to folks at a bar, flashing their Coda license, to prove they've "made it". "Hey baby, why don't you come back to my place, I've got a developer license for the entire JetBrains Product Suite" is simply not a thing.
The closest analogy I can think of, is probably in construction hardware tooling. Folks being "Mikita" vs "DeWalt" vs "Milwaukee" people or some such.
> It's like driving a $150,000 supercar to work, you look like a tool and everyone knows it.
That’s like your opinion, man.
If someone can afford to drive supercar to work - good for them. There’s nothing virtuous in poverty.
> No, not really. It's more that Mac users are famously price-insensitive, and since Apple deliberately neglects cross-platform APIs they can create a captive userbase of desperate and moneyed software customers. It's a culture of exploitation on either side, as Apple makes so abundantly clear with their desperate clawing at the iOS market and the right to process payment for thousands of microtransactions a second.
Again, that’s like your opinion. I grew up knowing that Mac is for artists and people with money because they don’t want to bother with freeware of varying quality.
"That’s like your opinion, man. If someone can afford to drive supercar to work - good for them. There’s nothing virtuous in poverty."
Off topic. While you are free to have your own opinions, we should not let such statements stand alone.
"If someone can afford to do xxx good for them." Can you think of any xxx -fill in the blank - that is not "good for them" admirable? I certainly can. There are way too many examples grab-em-by-the-p** billionaires in our world. They are not admirable, nor can I say "good for them".
"There is nothing virtuous in poverty". My experience differs. The most admirable, strongest, kindest and bravest I know, are those people who exist in poverty or at least struggle. And they are by far hardest working. Struggle can certainly break people and does.
It is a simple truth that we depend on each other. That "good for them" person you talk about depends on the work of others. It is a fact that we who are doing well are doing so at the expense of other people. But let us not celebrate that fact. If you are doing well, at least have the decency to understand your good fortune (aka luck).
> "If someone can afford to do xxx good for them." Can you think of any xxx -fill in the blank - that is not "good for them" admirable? I certainly can. There are way too many examples grab-em-by-the-p* billionaires in our world. They are not admirable, nor can I say "good for them".
Judging by the context of the discussion - we’re not talking about billionaires. We’re talking about your run of the mill wagie who made some cash and now drives his 911 because they can.
> "There is nothing virtuous in poverty". My experience differs. The most admirable, strongest, kindest and bravest I know, are those people who exist in poverty or at least struggle. And they are by far hardest working. Struggle can certainly break people and does.
Cool. What makes them virtuous is their hard work not that they’re poor. They’re virtuous despite being poor, not because of it.
If you’re seething at the thought of someone driving their expensive car to work - you’re just envious asshole who should mind their own business.
> You are editing text. If you rely on a paid product to do so then prepare to be a laughingstock when the license changes in a way you disagree with.
Jesus, laughingstock for whom? A couple of online nerds without life that have nothing better in life than laugh at someone who spent 99$? Go outside, touch some grass. Unless you get off of this behavior - in this case remove yourself from the internet, there’s too much toxic behavior already.
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
I still use VS Code the most, but I don't enjoy tinkering with endlessly customizable tools to get the perfect environment. I like an opinionated tool that has a solid handful of niceties, and doesn't abdicate features to a bazaar of plugins. Nova's good like that, but I miss Espresso, which I consider even more Mac-like for being a little offbeat but also had some genuine innovations like a GUI for CSS attributes. It hasn't been updated in several years, but I'm trying it again to see if it works better for the kids (learning web design) than Nova.