Software review - Commanders and Text editors.

Overview of software                              
---------------------------------------
 Denis Tokarczuk
                                        
 From the editor. We decided to change the name
Changing the section from "Review of the new" to "Review
p/o", since we will not be limited
more on a narrow category "new p/o"
(new) and we will consider now and in
his future in the context, so to speak,
"genre".  Therefore, we also introduce separation
ness in categories.                     
                                        
Commanders                              
---------------------------------------
                                        
 Recently, we have seen
new dominanceQC in the field of "command-
degrowth", due to the lack of
so to speak, “updating” competitive
Comrade   Although it appeared recently Perfect
Commander 2.0 (Alco release), but it is on
in my opinion, neither ideologically nor functionally,
even conoctab cannot implement
cQC.                            
                                        
 But on the other hand, if you take ce-
ria RC2,then QC also cannot be
he has competition for the same reason -
different ideology.  Therefore, we see con-
curence (I don’t want to say “struggle”)
implementations, namely ideas. And this competition
The rendition is interesting.                       
                                        
If we think this way, then
commanders can be classified according to
elementary category "functional-
ity":                                 
                                        
 "Light".   Not loaded with abundance
functions of commanders, requirements for which:
small size, easy to use and
minimum functionality: copy
deleting, deleting and linking files, compacting
disk storage, viewing pictures, andetc.
That is, roughly speaking, implementationTR-
DOS functions in the shell. K this category
can be attributed, for example, Perfect early
versions,  Global Commander, Monster Som-
mander, Real Commander(up to version 1.9),
MOA-service (like a classic of the genre), Total
Commander, etc.                       
                                        
 "Medium".  Elementary necessities
Complex functions are added to ours:
disk copying, formatting, pro-
viewing texts, fonts, sprites, viewing
Stitching music, all sorts of built-in
utilities (doctor, for example), etc.  Then
there are, in "average" commanders by means
programmer achieves the implementation of bo-
more than global functions. However, the process
and the functions in this class are, as it were, “closed”
you".  I would includeQC in this class,
PC2.0, RC (starting from version class 1.9,
but excluding RC2.x), Honey Commander.   "Complex" ("Big Commanders"). B
"big" commanders are being implemented
quite a wide range of actions from inside
initially and/or additional
functional functions due to modularity.
Moreover, often through these
commanders are also seeking to expand the func-
nationality and structure of the DOS itself (at-
example, implementation of a subdirectory system
we). A bright representative of this class
is the series Real Commander 2.       
                                        
 Perhaps this classification is
seems to be quite crude and contestable, so
like many of the listed commanders
have characteristics of a “higher”
class defined by me or do not have
these.  I looked at all this in the "computer"
Lex".  And taking the commander to one or
another class, was guided by its func-
national set.                     
                                        
 Thus, the use of
commander of one class or another
sa, is justified by the requirements: "what
do I need from the commander?" If he needs
a huge number of functions (that is, non-
the whole database is traversedactions), then it
the choice will fall on the “difficult class”; if
his demands (I’ll be honest - how y me-
nya) are not tall, and only from the commander
you need to format the floppy disk,
sometimes compact the disk, copy the file
ly, then his choice is the “light” class; if
the user often reads texts and immediately
listens to music, then his choice is ec-
Naturally it will be “middle class”.        
                                        
 From these considerations we can conclude
conclusion that commander competition is not
necessary, because we have exactly one “left”
a representative in each group.
But as I said above, the error is not in the
comparison process, and in the method (even
"categories") of assessment.  That is, how
this doesn't sound ridiculous, we have to
to compare ideologies, or rather
even concepts... Don't you agree?  Pi-
Come on, we can develop a discussion.          
                                        
Text editors                     
---------------------------------------
                                        
 In this category there is a clear
calm. More precisely, the vigorous activity of cy-
pit only y Alco, which does not skimp on
updates ACE. But quite recently y
he had quite a serious competitor -
HorrorWord,  which for some reason is not currently
pleases with its new versions. And edit
and there is something to add to it. For example,
implement transfers, otherwise if in 64-Ci-
in free text, their absence is practically
ki imperceptibly, then in 40(42)-character -
They are missing like air!              
                                        
 Now regarding ACE. Honestly, I
It’s been a while since I “upgraded” the recorded one
y me to a disk with texts for ZXTime
ACEO.79 (on January 8 he turned one year old) and,
looking at the innovations that
appeared in the new 0.91 and previous versions
siyah, I’m not going to do this for reasons
rank of insignificance (subjectively, from
regarding the usefulness of innovations to
ZXTime) changes and additions.         
                                        
 If we characterize it in general, then in
case cACE we observe a slow pro-
development process: adding small new
knowledge, killing glitches generated by
by them;  killing glitches that appeared from
killing glitches, long-awaited innovations
yami, etc.  In principle, the approach is clear and
meets common sense - lick code -
is adjusted, optimized and minimized
number of possible further super-
destructive errors at work.          
                                        
However, it seems to me that Alco is not
there is enough radicalism in relation to cACE.
For several !years! we are waiting for a full
blockFORMATINGtext (aligned
reading on both fields of an entire block/paragraph
ts/text taking into account hyphens, etc.).
What is implemented for auto-formatting
writing one line will not result in fo-
pmatupobahue block! Command (ss+j) from-
wearing a highlighted fragment bocnpuhu-
toils only as a half-measure, not decisive
problems, and the cook, I would say, "is
fabricated product" for further thorough
processing... But in general - ACE is the most
more dynamic (in terms of the rate at which updates are released)
leniya) and high-speed text re-
daktor.  I wonder what version it will be
after 0.99?   First, or 0.999, or
0.9999 ... or 0.(9)?                   
                                        
 In general, I would like to enter the field
text editors are more lively
actions. Since in terms of functionality
sti, in first place (no matter how country-
but) there is still Micro Editor,
the latest version of which was released in
1998 year. Although, I don’t argue, for many
"first" still remainsIS-DOS edi-
then  and, I won’t hide, I myself once admired
its good selection of functions.          
                                        
 I would also like to remember the kind words
and, apparently, about a stillborn
project  SamWord.  It seemed to me that
it was a pretty strong start
(you can read his review in ZXT#13) and
it contained extraordinary functions,
which the authors have not yet implemented
leading projects today (ACE, HRW).