Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

BBEdit 7.1 Adds Safari-Based Preview

Posted by pudge on from the way-cool-junior dept.

A user writes, "BBEdit has added a 'Preview in BBEdit' command in 7.1, so you can preview HTML inside BBEdit itself, using the Apple's Safari libraries." Also added is support for SFTP (file transfers over SSH), Rendezvous discovery of FTP servers, and more. Just-released version 7.1.1 adds more refresh options for the Preview feature.

57 comments

  1. Nice Program by sinclair44 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    BBEdit was, is, and probably will be an awsome program for the Mac. It's emacs without the bloat. :) But everyone here's heard of it, right? RIGHT?!

    --
    Omnes stulti sunt.
    1. Re:Nice Program by Hanji · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I'd actually like to nominate jEdit as being the true emacs of the GUI age. It's about as extensible, customizeable, and scriptable, and it's even BIGGER!

      (It's also an awesome editor, if you have the system resources to burn ~30MB RAM on a text editor)

      --
      A Minesweeper clone that doesn't suck
    2. Re:Nice Program by russellh · · Score: 3, Informative
      But everyone here's heard of it, right? RIGHT?!

      I used the free version 2.1.3 for years but Alpha has been my main text editor on the Mac since 1993 or so. Now that is the closest a real mac app has ever gotten to emacs.

      --
      must... stay... awake...
    3. Re:Nice Program by fputs(shit,+slashdot · · Score: 1, Insightful
      ~30MB RAM on a text editor
      Seven tabs open (ext) 16MB. Jedit is also stable I leave it running for months. Began using it because big multi-lang projects in Vim were difficult and Jedit validates all XML.

      BBedit looks nice but only for really for web devel and wit so many free (beer) text editors and html editors I'm curious how popular is it?

      --
      I am the bastard of base minus 12! Turing was the ejaculate of my complete machine!
    4. Re:Nice Program by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative
      Thinking BBEdit is "only for web development" is a common and forgivable mistake, but whoever modded this guy up for repeating such nonsense is an idiot.

      In answer to your question, it is the most popular text editor for the Mac ever, to the point that many Mac users consider it essential to OS X even being condidered worth having. It's popular with web people, but anybody who needs to edit a lot of text can use it.

      Personally, I prefer it over emacs... but then again, I'm more of a vi guy when stuck with a command prompt, so maybe I'm the wrong person to ask.

    5. Re:Nice Program by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, they took out the bloat and replaced it with a $179 price tag instead.

      I'm sure it's a great program and all, but nearly two hundred bucks is just a wee bit steep for a text editor.

    6. Re:Nice Program by capmilk · · Score: 1
      wit so many free (beer) text editors and html editors

      Name some. I am still looking for a php editor on OS X that offers an overview over the classes and functions of a project...

  2. Re:hey by neverkevin · · Score: 2, Informative

    It is not on the front page, the story is only on the apple section.

  3. Emacs key bindings by goombah99 · · Score: 1, Informative
    I have truly loved bbedit but am thinking of phasing it out in favor of the xcode IDE.

    The thing I really miss in bbedit is the lack of emacs key bindings. So many times I want to just kill a line with a key stroke rather than selecting and cutting it.

    bbedit is really showing its roots as a carbon app by not having these things which all other text windows in OS X have.

    The other thing I'd like would be a nice context sensitive pretty-indent for computer languages. Emacs binds this to the tab-key but bbedit does not seem to have it. which is odd since it does have context sensitive coloring so you know its language aware.

    I dont really care too much about the proliferation of exotic special use features without some of these more basic universal editing features.

    --
    Some drink at the fountain of knowledge. Others just gargle.
    1. Re:Emacs key bindings by nosferatu-man · · Score: 4, Informative

      Errr ...

      I use Emacs exclusively on my Mac, but firing up BBEdit and checking out the preferences, under "Text Editing" ... lo and behold! "Use Emacs Key Bindings"

      'jfb

      --
      To spur "enterprise Linux," Big Bang, the distributed two-phase commit.
    2. Re:Emacs key bindings by pudge · · Score: 2, Informative

      The thing I really miss in bbedit is the lack of emacs key bindings

      That reflects a lot more on you than on BBEdit. Go to Preferences->"Text Editing"->"Use Emacs Key Bindings". It's right there. :)

    3. Re:Emacs key bindings by LanceDBoyles · · Score: 0

      Kill a line that the cursor is on: just like any Mac text editor or text field, MS Word included... Shift-down-arrow (highlight from the cursor to the end) Then you can hit return or delete to clear the contents. Command-left-arrow, Shift-down-arrow (first move left, then do the above). These are nearly universal on the Mac.

      --
      My .sig field just wouldn't be the same without its .roy
    4. Re:Emacs key bindings by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well golly gee. Thanks! sort of hidden away.

    5. Re:Emacs key bindings by Hes+Nikke · · Score: 2, Interesting

      i've been pretty close to ditching BBEdit (6.5 i admit, it's hefty upgrade for a TextEditor)in favor of a SubEthaEdit/Xcode combo. (SubEthaEdit for a live updating HTML preview, AND mutilple people working on the same file at the same time. Xcode for C/C++/Obj.C programing without other people involved) i might have to give the new BBEdit a try now that it has one of my favoroite SubEthaEdit features :)

      (oh, and given that SubEthatEdit is cocoa, it's got your Emacs key bindings - freak)

      --
      Don't call me back. Give me a call back. Bye. So yeah. But bye our, well, but alright we are on a shirt this chill.
  4. Whoah Bessie! by IM6100 · · Score: 1

    Is this like the Emacs extension that does a web browser?

    What's the world coming to? Is there a zippy fortunes extension for BBEdit yet? How about the Sokoban game?

    heh

    --
    A Good Intro to NetBS
  5. Useful? by muchmusic · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I can't find a use for BBEdit outside of this niche these days either. I once used it to open stubborn text files and the like (much like I once used GraphicConverter to open stubborn image files), but the only reference I've seen in software recently to BBEdit it in dreamweaver's option to work with this app to edit code and the like. I imagine that this experience is not unique - it seems that as more standards support is added to the mac os, and as file systems become stronger, there is less and less use for this sort of app.

    --
    -- If an artist saw things as they truly are, they would cease to be an artist.
    1. Re:Useful? by ZackSchil · · Score: 0, Troll

      Dreamweaver's renderer is atrocious. Dreamweaver's syntax coding is lacking. Dreamweaver butchers code. Dreamweaver is slower than death on a bender. It's awesome for PHP code.

    2. Re:Useful? by muchmusic · · Score: 1

      phew! I feel like I should add that I don't use dreamweaver on a regular basis now to save my ego from a bruising!

      --
      -- If an artist saw things as they truly are, they would cease to be an artist.
    3. Re:Useful? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      True. The entire BBEdit text system was once a boon - today it's fully redundant.

      BBEdit is a dinosaur.

    4. Re:Useful? by rootofevil · · Score: 1

      ever done unix development on a central cluster? thats how most everyone here does their class projects. for being able to open the file directly from the FTP/SFTP server and then save it back, i havent found anything better. not that ive been seriously looking, BBEdit kicks ass. side note - i have a BBEdit shirt from many macworlds past, version 5 or 6 or something - and its still accurate today "BBEdit, it still doesnt suck."

      --
      turn up the jukebox and tell me a lie
  6. Yawn. by swdunlop · · Score: 4, Interesting

    SubEthaEdit, which was once called Hydra, has had both of these features for a couple months now. It also offers some pretty intriguing collaborative editing functionality, is written purely in Cocoa, and is both free and open. It integrated quite nicely with InputMethod extensions, like TextExtras, as well.

    BBEdit was nice, before OS X and the availability of jEdit, jExt, emacs/carbon, vim and many of the other cross-platform editors. Now, it has fallen a bit behind the times, and is not worth the cost.

    --
    Weapons of Mass Analysis
    1. Re:Yawn. by CoolMoDee · · Score: 5, Informative
      From their FAQ
      Did you think about releasing SubEthaEdit as OpenSource?
      We are currently working on cleaning up and refactoring SubEthaEdit's networking and collaboration code. This will probably be released as a (open source) framework late(r) this year.

      SubEthaEdit isn't open source *yet* but hopefully it will be sometime soon.
      --
      Jisho - A Japanese English German Russian French Dictionary for the rest of us.
    2. Re:Yawn. by swdunlop · · Score: 1

      Gah. I seem to remember seeing a link to a tarball at some point, my apologies, I'll have to take back some of the vitriol in my previous comment. Since returning to the Apple flock last year, I've used Hydra whenever I found myself wanting a nicely integrated text editor. Some of its more unique features, like block editing, have made it a heavily used part of my toolkit, even when I'm not using its collaboration features.

      Hydra's collaborative editing is the reason I bought a second mac for my wife..

      --
      Weapons of Mass Analysis
  7. Insanely Expensive Software by ChuckleBug · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I can't understand why anyone would pay $179 for BBEdit. I have always liked its free version, and at one time was thinking of buying it, but I was poor at the time. Now that I *could* afford it, I can't see why I'd want to shell out that much for a text editor that doesn't offer any more than emacs, or vim, or a lot of others.

    Can anyone explain how this app is worth $179?

    1. Re:Insanely Expensive Software by pudge · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I can't understand why anyone would pay $179 for BBEdit.

      Because they don't realize you can download BBEdit Lite, then buy the BBEdit for the upgrade price of $119?

      On a different note: an app you spend all your time in, that you rely heavily on, is worth a lot of money. I'd pay a lot more than $179 for BBEdit.

    2. Re:Insanely Expensive Software by moof1138 · · Score: 4, Informative

      BBEdit is really really nice. Personally I hate emacs. I write a lot of Perl and HTML. I now spend my time bouncing between BBEdit and vim - BBEdit for local editing, vim for time when I am SSHed in somewhere remote. BBEdit is definitely far nicer to work with, though I find GUI text editor inherently superior. BBEdit has rectangular selection - I would hate to imagine how you would implement that in a non-GUI editor. BBEdit also has a lot of features where you might in theory be able to do the thing in another editor, but it is a pain. I always dread complex replacing in a selection of text based on a regex in vim. In BBEdit it is intuitive. And BBEdit has a lot of other features that vim does not have, or that vim/other editor has but it is such a pain in the ass to find or use that it may as well not have them. BBEdit is scriptable via any scripting language out there that runs on OS X - AppleScript, Perl, Python, sh, whatever. I have written custom Perl filters for it, they integrate seamlessly.

      BBEdit makes a great HTML editor for those of us who prefer to do it by hand. The HTML debgging and validation in it are brilliant and outshine competitors on any platform. And its abilities for testing pages easily in multiple browsers has saved me a lot of aggravation.

      Finally it makes a brilliant IDE for Perl - sure you can run scripts from an editor in vim and others, but BBEdit is better. I love having a Perl debugger where I can doubleclick on an error and have the offending line hilighted. It makes a good IDE for shell scripts too.

      If you write code professionally that BBEdit excels at editing (HTML, Perl, etc.) then it is likely to be worth it. If not, you probably aren't going to be compelled to purchae a text editor, when there are decent (though inferior) free ones.

      --

      Hyperbole is the worst thing ever.
    3. Re:Insanely Expensive Software by ChuckleBug · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I can't understand why anyone would pay $179 for BBEdit.

      Because they don't realize you can download BBEdit Lite, then buy the BBEdit for the upgrade price of $119?

      There is no longer any BBEdit Lite. That path made a lot more sense to me. But Bare Bones eliminated it.

      I understand why someone who's been using it a long time and relies on it heavily would be willing to spend the money. I just find it hard to see why someone would switch from something else. But hey, if it's that good, and it's worth it to you, great.

    4. Re:Insanely Expensive Software by pudge · · Score: 5, Informative

      There is no longer any BBEdit Lite.

      It is no longer supported, but it is still available, and it still qualifies for the "BBEdit 7.1 Cross-Upgrade from BBEdit Lite, Adobe GoLive, Macromedia Dreamweaver (3.0 or later)" price of BBEdit. Shrug.

      I just find it hard to see why someone would switch from something else.

      And I find it hard to see why people like the New York Yankees. Shrug.

    5. Re:Insanely Expensive Software by ChuckleBug · · Score: 1

      If you write code professionally that BBEdit excels at editing (HTML, Perl, etc.) then it is likely to be worth it. If not, you probably aren't going to be compelled to purchae a text editor, when there are decent (though inferior) free ones.

      Thanks for the helpful (and enlightening) answer. I've used BBEdit Lite a lot in the past (I'm an old school Mac guy who fell into the Windows abyss due to job concerns and have recently returned to the fold), and I didn't see why BBEdit would be an improvement over the free stuff.

      It's funny how passionate people get about their editor of choice. Your rational reply was kind of surprising. :)

    6. Re:Insanely Expensive Software by mikeybee · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Well, I saved myself about ten hours of pain using the rectangular selection capability of BBEdit.fullvers to enable me to copy and paste contiguous rectangular chunks of HTML (headers attributes in tables... AAA-compliant financials are hell) That's worth about $500, so I'd say I was $321 ahead.

    7. Re:Insanely Expensive Software by icklemichael · · Score: 2, Informative

      BBEdit has rectangular selection - I would hate to imagine how you would implement that in a non-GUI editor

      What? You mean like ctrl-v in vi? :)

      There is a way to do it in a tty in (x)emacs but I can't remember what it is, in x with xemacs it's just meta and the left button.

      Does anyone know if it's possible to do a rectangular selection in eclipse?

    8. Re:Insanely Expensive Software by pvera · · Score: 4, Interesting

      The productivity gains I have thanks to BBEdit save us a ton of money per week. I work in a mac shop with Microsoft-based web apps (the horror!) and the workflow process is terrible and with little hope. What used to take hours of cutting and pasting to convert between totally dissimilar formats is now done 99% with just one click, thanks to the Perl filters and built-in features of BBEdit Pro. It is not just a speed advantage, it also saves us a ton on quality assurance, since with all this scripting we got rid of hundreds of places where errors could be added to the documents.

      The one thing BBEdit cannot do is select a column from a HTML table unless there is a specific pattern I can regex for. That one task is done in Dreamweaver MX, everything else is done in BBEdit Pro.

      BTW, mine was not $179, I got really lucky. I paid $79 for BBEdit 6.5 and like a week later 7.0 came out and they gave me a free upgrade.

      --
      Pedro
      ----
      The Insomniac Coder
    9. Re:Insanely Expensive Software by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      What? You mean like ctrl-v in vi? :)

      No.

    10. Re:Insanely Expensive Software by phch · · Score: 2, Informative

      As another poster mentioned, Ctrl-V in vim has allowed rectangular selection for some time. In emacs, cua-mode allows rectangular selection as well, and it's easy to use.

      I've heard nice things about BBEdit, but if you use several platforms regularly (not just mac), I find a cross-platform editor is preferable. Besides, it's unlikely that BBEdit will ever be able to support such specialty needs as a mode for the IDL language.

    11. Re:Insanely Expensive Software by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      BBEdit has rectangular selection - I would hate to imagine how you would implement that in a non-GUI editor

      What? You mean like ctrl-v in vi? :)

      There is a way to do it in a tty in (x)emacs but I can't remember what it is, in x with xemacs it's just meta and the left button.

      C-space to set the mark in one corner of the intended rectangle, then just move to the opposite corner of said rectangle and apply any of several rectangle-specific commands (copy to register, delete (C-x r d), etc). I even use this in my X11 version as it's usually faster than using the mouse. vim's version is faster still, as it gives rectangular highlighting and requires fewer keystrokes for executing commands.
    12. Re:Insanely Expensive Software by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'd pay a lot more than $179 for BBEdit.

      Ok, great, then I have a lot of software to sell to you too. Get your wallet ready. See you on eBay. Be prepared to SPEND.

    13. Re:Insanely Expensive Software by pudge · · Score: 1

      Is that supposed to make sense? Just curious, because it appears as though it is supposed to make sense, but it actually doesn't. I admit to being baffled.

    14. Re:Insanely Expensive Software by shmert · · Score: 1
      BBEdit has rectangular selection - I would hate to imagine how you would implement that in a non-GUI editor.

      vim: ctrl-v to go into rectangular visual mode, select the text you want, perform the appropriate action.
      --
      You drank my drink, you drunk!
  8. Re:Kill a line by SessionExpired · · Score: 3, Informative
    So many times I want to just kill a line with a key stroke rather than selecting and cutting it.

    Cmd-L, Cmd-X

    mij

    --
    You want the taste of dried leaves boiled in water?
  9. Dreamweaver by mgahs · · Score: 3, Insightful

    This is one of the main reasons I use Dreamweaver, so I can preview + tweak code at the same time.

    If BBEdit adds the site management that Dreamweaver has, I may switch to BBEdit full time...

    1. Re:Dreamweaver by coolmacdude · · Score: 4, Insightful

      If BBEdit adds the site management that Dreamweaver has, I may switch to BBEdit full time...

      Not going to happen. BBEdit is such a good program because it is simple. It is developed by Bare Bones software. It is a bare bones text editor. It does what it does and is the best at it. It's not going to morph into something else.

      --

      -You may license this sig for only $6.99.
    2. Re:Dreamweaver by the+argonaut · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Somewhere around BBEdit 4 or so I may have agreed with you, but not anymore. BBEdit has been suffering from feature bloat ever since people figured out it was a great HTML editor, and now with the Webcore preview feature, it's coming one step closer to being a WYSIWYG web page editor. Add in the FTP capabilities, remote editing, and the file group feature and you already have basic site management. All that's really needed is a bit of refinement and it's there.

      On a side note, I have yet to find a web page editor with a site management feature I like. Unless there was something I missed in Dreamweaver MX or it's changed in MX 2004, the biggest thing I found lacking is that you can only synchronize between your local computer and one other system. The way I had my setup was a local copy for editing, a home web server for testing, and then I would upload to my actual server. Dreamweaver doesn't allow for a setup like this, so I would ultimately have to upload the files to my website manually either from my system or the test server. It also doesn't allow for the possibility that you could have one site spanning two remote servers without having to create a separate site for each system (although I am guessing this is a rare occurrence, I do know of one non-profit that I created a site for that had this type setup. What the reasoning behind it was I don't know, but since I didn't have control over it I just had to deal with it).

      --
      fuck you.
    3. Re:Dreamweaver by coolmacdude · · Score: 2, Informative

      Somewhere around BBEdit 4 or so I may have agreed with you, but not anymore. BBEdit has been suffering from feature bloat ever since people figured out it was a great HTML editor

      As far as software goes these days (what isn't bloated?) BBedit is one of the least bloated and highly focused programs out there. They have added a few more features recently, but I see them as more of a useful extension of what it already did rather than unnecessary junk.

      --

      -You may license this sig for only $6.99.
    4. Re:Dreamweaver by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not bloated? Here's an exercise: count up the number of options in BBEdit's Preferences. You have six hours. Go...

    5. Re:Dreamweaver by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      BBEdit is such a good program because it is simple. It is developed by Bare Bones software. It is a bare bones text editor. It does what it does and is the best at it. It's not going to morph into something else.

      Hey everybody! Over here! We got ourselves another moron!

    6. Re:Dreamweaver by Pope · · Score: 2, Informative

      I sort of agree, except I'd use 5 as the "best" available edition. 6 went Carbon, and even in OS9 the speed of window updates and file saving went down a noticible amount. I used to handcode sites for a living, and in 6 these slowdowns were annoyances that were offset by better search/replace (after I bugged them on a MacNN review page that drag and drop broke! That's sloppy QA in my opinion) and OSX compatibility.

      I can't seen upgrading to 7 at this time, since I don't code for a living at the moment. One feature that BBEdit has needed desperately for years (IMO) is the ability to customize the HTML layout like HomeSite has had since version 3! Dammit, I want all my left justified, and TR indented 1 tab and TD indented 2 tabs. Makes cleaning up others' code a pain in ass.

      --
      It doesn't mean much now, it's built for the future.
  10. Minor nit by Have+Blue · · Score: 3, Informative

    It's called WebKit, not "the Safari library".

  11. Re:hey by dtfinch · · Score: 3, Funny

    So that's what that checkbox did.

  12. HTML by PrintError · · Score: 2, Informative

    Well I'm extatic about this. I'm not a huge fan of making web pages, but I have to do it quite often for school. I do all of my sites in raw html to ease the boredom, and I use BBEdit exclusively. Being able to preview right in the program will make it that much easier to get my pages right faster.

    Thank you Bare Bones. I have a feeling my productivity just went WAY up with this upgrade!

    this sig is a muppet in hiding

  13. This is not the HTML editor we need... by Stormwatch · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Hand-coding HTML might be fine for geeks, but most regular users could use a WYSIWYG editor that is not as confusing as Dreamweaver and not as simplistic as Mozilla's built-in editor.

    What I mean is, of course... good old discontinued CLARIS HOME PAGE. Someone has to make an editor that totally replicates CHP's interface and functionality, but that will generate modern HTML/CSS/whatever.

    --
    Circumcision is child abuse.
    1. Re:This is not the HTML editor we need... by Stormwatch · · Score: 1

      If I did... I'd be a Windows user. ;)

      --
      Circumcision is child abuse.
  14. Recovering BBEdit junkie by koehn · · Score: 1

    When I used macs exclusively, I used BBEdit a ton, and sang its praises from the mountaintops. Now that I use every platform imaginable from a Windows box, I broke down and learned vi to exhaustion. It does everything BBEdit does (in terms of editing text), works on every platform, and is free.