[ditoax]

It isn't as pretty as Sublime Text but I am a long time (~15 years I think now) user of UltraEdit. I have never used the Linux or OS X versions just Windows but it is a pretty solid editor with loads of features and very, very fast. Kind of pricy these days though, I bought it a long time ago with a lifetime upgrade license and it has been well worth the money IMHO.

[jasallen]

I always like UltraEdit and paid the premium for many years. Two things happened though (1) it competed by getting bloated rather than better -- honestly the 2000/1 version may have been favorite. and (2) The world (or my subsection of it) coalesced around ST -- well, other than the VIMs and EMACS faithful.

So I adapted, and I really do like ST. Got the features I want, and a clean interface.

[ditoax]

Yeah I know what you mean about the bloat added in the 00s that was crap. They did seem to listen a lot to their users though as things got better. It isn't as quick to load as Sublime Text 3 (which is lightening fast!) but it can open big (like several hundred MB or more) files in and instant whereas Sublime Text is a lot slower.

My biggest gripe with UltraEdit is that it basically has zero ways to extend it. It has no plugin system and their macro system is horrible. This is where Sublime Text is really great.

[uptown]

I used to use UltraEdit on the PC, but they were slow to get their OSX version to market, and wound up sticking with Sublime Text 2. I'll need to check if their recent Mac builds up-to-par with what they used to offer on the PC?