From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search
WikiProject Apple Inc. (Rated Start-class, High-importance)
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Apple Inc., a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Apple, Macintosh, iOS and related topics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.
Checklist icon
 High  This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Other text editors[edit]

The sentence "Mac OS X, as a Unix-based operating system, also includes emacs, vi and pico as well as other terminal-based text editors." doesn't seem to flow with the rest of the intro. I'm not sure the best way to fix this, so I'm leaving it as it is for now. -- Matthew0028 21:32, 11 April 2006 (UTC)

I seem to remember a program called Tex-Edit on a 68K mac I saw a month ago, is it the same Program as TextEdit?

It is not the same thing, although I believe it is also available for Mac OS X. Wikifan42 13:15, 1 July 2006 (UTC)

Yes, you're thinking of Tex-Edit Plus, available for 68k, PPC & 80x86 Macs. Honestly, I'd say its better than BBEdit. (talk) 03:16, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

Linux Equivalent?[edit]

TextEdit is the strongest text editor I know of that is also lightweight, especially since it reads and writes rtf documents. If the source code is really freely published under the GNU, is there a Linux equivalent, and can a link be posted here?-- 02:33, 30 September 2006 (UTC)

Try for GNUstep. Don't expect the same Mac OS X experience, however, since much of the present Mac version depends on proprietary API not found elsewhere. +mt 21:54, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Apple TextEdit.png[edit]

Nuvola apps important.svg

Image:Apple TextEdit.png is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 19:50, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

Open source - what license?[edit]

The article says it's open source ... what license is it under? (I just opened it on this Mac and "About TextEdit" doesn't say anything about a license.) - David Gerard 18:53, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

  • BSD-family licenses are always a pain to identify ;-) but I did. Free to modify/redistribute, no requirements on advertising, no endorsement = New BSD Arru (talk) 14:38, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

Not a word processor[edit]

I really like the program, but I think it's way too much of a stretch to call TextEdit a word processor, it's even called TextEdit for gosh sake. I'll remove it from the categories and clean up the article in a while if no one objects. (talk) 03:16, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

I think of TextEdit as a word processor, but a basic one. A word processor is, to my understanding, anything used for typing documents. TextEdit doesn't have all the features that other word processors do, but that helps make it smaller and faster. If you want to add things other than text (such as pictures) you should not use TextEdit. But if you're just typing a paper, it is one of the faster word processors. R41 tmf (talk) 01:04, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

I agree with R41 tmf. Anything from nano up is a word processor. And, erm, TextEdit can do pictures too, it's standard in rtfd.—[semicolons]— 10:30, 15 June 2008 (UTC)

Easter egg[edit]

Apart from the fact that an icon can hardly be called an Easter egg, it seems a bit silly to have an entire section containing one line of text.—[semicolons]— 10:32, 15 June 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject Macintosh?[edit]

The information box at the top of the discussion page is incredibly vague. Perhaps somebody could edit the box to indicate: 1) Is it still possible for the public to edit the article? 2) Are only WikiProject members allowed to edit the article? 3) So what if the WikiProject is not currently working to improve it? I'm sorry but the information box should provide some clear guidance for people. WWriter (talk) 05:05, 27 August 2008 (UTC)


This section describes the text in the TextEdit 1.5 icon… why is this relevant? —Frungi (talk) 01:23, 22 March 2009 (UTC)

Source code-- gone?[edit]

The link in the "source code" section is dead. Apple may have pulled that code when Lion was released? I feel like some acknowledgement of this should be made on the page. If they released the source once it's still open source, but I don't know where to find a copy. Awk (talk) 06:00, 2 February 2012 (UTC)

<list of websites removed>
The link has not been dead for a long time. The source code is available from Apple and archived in the Wayback Machine. I'm removing the list of questionable sites which will post anything. StarryGrandma (talk) 23:13, 18 March 2014 (UTC)