Re: TextEdit, is it really that lame?
Re: TextEdit, is it really that lame?
- Subject: Re: TextEdit, is it really that lame?
- From: "John C. Welch" <email@hidden>
- Date: Tue, 07 Mar 2006 19:35:06 -0600
- Thread-topic: TextEdit, is it really that lame?
On 3/7/06 19:29, "Bill Briggs" <email@hidden> wrote:
>> Word's scriptability is less lame and more very, very, odd, but that's a
>> situation imposed by having to server two masters. It's gotten better, as
>> v.X's was really quite unusable.
>
> I do have a copy of it on my PowerBook, only because the university has a
> site license for it (I would never have bought it) and I from time to time
> have to open an Excel spreadsheet, so I installed the whole suite. But looking
> at the dictionary and seeing commands like "create new mailing label
> document" that have a command and what should be an object all in a very long
> command don't really inspire confidence in the way it has been done. I take it
> that you mean it has to satisfy the Javascript OM on Windows, which perverts
> it in the AppleScript domain.
VBA's object model actually, but yes, that's the reason why. They don't have
the luxury or manpower to duplicate both implementations
--
Ladies and gentlemen, you must resist those all-too-human feelings and
decide this case on the evidence. And the evidence plainly shows that Mr.
Landa's injuries, disfiguring as they are, are nowhere near as important to
a free society as the fundamental right to make smart-ass remarks.
--
Katie @ AtAT
_______________________________________________
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
Applescript-users mailing list (email@hidden)
Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
This email sent to email@hidden