Client Test Summary

I’ve completed my tests of the Mac blog clients that I’ve managed to dig up. As a refresher, they are these:

  1. WordPress built-in web client
  2. MacJournal
  3. Ecto
  4. MarsEdit
  5. Blogo
  6. Flock

Blogo and Flock are definitely not for me, for reasons I’ve hinted at before.

MarsEdit certainly looks nice, but it lacks a word count widget and it does not work with rich text; it works in markup land only, which is not what I want out of a blog client.

Ecto works quite well with WordPress (but not so much with Blogger, but I don’t care about that), and the price is right: $18. The word count widget is modal, not modeless, so it interrupts my writing when I want to check my word count. It features a rich text editor that’s appropriate for a strict blogging app.

MacJournal is gorgeous. It looks good, it works well (I’m writing with it now, in fact). I has a nice, live word count widget. It features the full-up Mac rich text editor I’d hope for. The price ($35) is a little steep for me for a blogging client, but that’s because it’s not a blogging client. It’s a journaling app with blogging capability. Unfortunately, its management of WordPress’s categories and tags leaves a lot to be desired. Although it uses categories perfectly well, it doesn’t allow you to create your own in the app itself. And although it uses the standard Mac tagging system for metadata, those tags are apparently not shipped back up to the blog.

The WordPress built-in web client is also gorgeous. It has a mostly live word count that’s modeless. It has an appropriate rich text editor, albeit with non-Mac shortcuts for formatting. The price is perfect, though, and it’s obviously 100% compatible with WordPress. It’s not an offline editor, of course, which puts it out of the scope of this testing, strictly speaking, but still, it’s quite good.

I’ll probably use the built-in client for most things, resorting to one of my existing text editors (Journler or Scrivener) for offline work. MacJournal looks really nice, though. Really nice.

And of course, these tests might all go to hell when I try to add images to posts…

Advertisements
Posted in Apps. Tags: . 2 Comments »

2 Responses to “Client Test Summary”

  1. ericstephenvorm Says:

    I looked at MacJournal as well, and found it pretty nice. Overall, however, I chose Journler because I felt that it was much more feature rich and offered the consistency that I am always looking for when I consider where to park my journal. After all, I have more than 10 years worth of life recorded between paper and digital copy. Anything I pick I want to be around for a long time with plenty of support.

    I think it’s really a shame that Journler dropped their blogging ability. I use it every day for so much, and I would love to be able to post to my wordpress blog using the program. I have some seriously nested files, tons of smart folders, and tags galore already in Journler. It would be such a convenience to be able to blog through there. As it is, I have a smart folder set up for anything I tag with “blog”, then I cut and paste into WordPress’ web client to post. Not optimal at all.

    I can’t seem to find much talk about the new version of Journler and what the update will bring either. I’ve had the warning that I’ll have to pay for the next version on there for months and months, and the announcement that it was going to shareware and that the blogging ability was dropped over a year ago. Any idea what’s in store with the next version, and when it might be here? ~ESV
    thepaceofnature.wordpress.com

  2. cjschaller Says:

    It sounded like the author of Journler was unsatisfied with his previous blog support, which I can appreciate. He talks more about his roadmap for Journler 2.6 on his blog: http://www.getsprouted.com/blog/index.php – He hopes to have 2.6 out by the end of December, which still gives him a couple of days…

    I like the idea of using tags and smart folders to sort out entries. I’m going to adopt that myself. I’m quite pleased to see that I can paste rich text into the WordPress editor and it preserves its relevant formatting, so at least one doesn’t have to rework that. (This works with WordPress 2.7, Safari, and Leopard, at any rate; I’m not sure about other versions.)


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: