Hey, since everyone seems to be excited about the new editor typography and it being streamlined with other markdown rendering applications I’d like to share a different perspective. I use Bear a lot for my dev notes. See the pictures:
I totally agree. I don’t envy the developers with everyone’s feedback. In my opinion, many things are being changed and getting time and effort that a) no one really wanted and b) are inferior to the original product. Tables is straightforward request and a basic feature of modern presentation of information. But bear dev makes me feel guilty for asking for it for years and then like “well, we’re working so hard on these other items” such that at this point i’d prefer using “bear legacy” as is than risk all the changes i don’t want. I get that’s how apple design works, and i find it annoying that every 2 years my apple products undergo a revamp.
I wonder if it can be an advanced setting down the line. Although myself have no issue with either of the method I saw plenty of people complaining about both methods.
On the whole I prefer the Bear formatting above to the Panda formatting in the example above.
Although I do prefer at least the option of “hidden” formatting for headers and BIU
I’d rather have the list numbers where they are in the Bear example,
the new fonts for code blocks look busier to me and
the grey background for code blocks also looks busier than the older box.
extending the code box to the left margin looks particularly bad to me and
seems to work against setting the code off from the “normal” text.
I am no developer, so I have no idea if it is doable, but with soo many requests of putting the lists back out to the gutter, I wonder if it can be possible to outdent the lists to the gutter. It would be an extra step for you guys, but they did push in the list into the gutter in accordance to feature requests, so…
