Subscribe to
NSLog(); Header Image

Bare Bones Sucks: Not Really

Wanted to clear one thing up: I don't think Bare Bones sucks - I got that comment from a chap on an IRC channel. It's a parody of their "BBEdit: It Still Doesn't Suck" slogan.

Personally, I think they're doing some awesome work. I think BBEdit Lite was an awesome product for the price (free), and it's a tribute to them that they provided it (free) for so long. $49 may be overpriced for a text editor, but I suppose they'll find out.

I just made a comment to Judi that BBEdit Lite -> TextWrangler is very much like iTools -> .Mac. I fully supported .Mac, and was simply grateful that Apple had seen fit to provide a free service for so long. I feel similarly towards Bare Bones. Were I an avid BBEdit Lite user, I'd evaluate my needs, and probably cough up the $49 or go back to TextEdit (free). I'm not actually facing that choice, though: I'll stick with BBEdit.

5 Responses to "Bare Bones Sucks: Not Really"

  1. i think your analogy is a little off. bbedit lite is _still_ free unlike with itools and .mac, where you were forced to pay or stop using those services. but with bbedit lite and wrangler you can still use bbedit lite for free or pay and get wrangler, which has more features than bbedit lite. yes?

  2. hum. guess i should have checked all of my facts first. heh. let me rephrase: "bbedit lite is _still_ free as long as you already have it downloaded." that work?

  3. The analogy would only be correct if BareBones were somehow burdened with the bandwidth everytime you launched BBEdit Lite.

    As it appears, the analogy is flawed anyway.

    What do I know? I use xemacs.

  4. And, apparently, the analogy isn't flawed.

    Hey, what are the chances of getting four responses from Zacs (even if we both replied to our own comments) in a row?

  5. Of course what does suck is the "newish" bare bones web site. The previous verion was much easier to use and look at.