From TeX on Mac OS X wiki

I'm not sure this page is as helpful as it might be.

• The entries should really be in alphabetical order if not otherwise arranged but I noticed that Latexian was moved down to the bottom so I hesitate to move it to second place which is where I think it should be logically.
  • Probably front-ends TS and TW coming with MacTeX should be on the top. Victor Ivrii 07:42, 22 December 2010 (UTC)
  • I don't understand myself why it was moved there. I think it should be moved to its alphabetical place. --Joseph Slater 23:38, 21 December 2010 (UTC)
  • I originally added Latexian and believed that it should be at the bottom as 1) newcomer 2) shareware. However no strong feelings. Victor Ivrii 07:42, 22 December 2010 (UTC)
• Several entries here say nothing about the front ends concerned. I'm including those entries which consist entirely of quotes from the authors' descriptions, whether these are explicitly attributed or not. This is, in my view, quite misleading. For example, Latexian cites syntax-aware spell-checking as an advanced feature but this is available in any Cocoa-aware front-end with the Cocoa version of aspell installed and, I'm sure in other editors/front-ends besides. I don't see anything in the description of Latexian or TextMate, for example, which strikes me as unique or even terribly unusual. I should say that I don't mean to pick on these applications. I'm concerned that because it is easy to quote author blurb - especially for products which we may not have tried (and may not wish to pay to try) - we are ending up with a page which makes it look a little bit as though the really good choices are non-free (as in beer but especially as in speech) and I doubt that is true. In fact, I would be somewhat surprised if the best choices - for many people - are not, as it happens or not, free.
  • I could not provide anything but the author description for Latexian. Victor Ivrii 07:42, 22 December 2010 (UTC)
  • Some of them may still be from the transition from Gary Gray's site, others for the sake of expediency. I agree that some prudent editing should be done. Part of the problem is a lack of experience with each of the codes. I used to make sure I had tried them all, but I haven't had the time for LaTeXian. Further, since I'm not willing to buy it just to review it, I won't be able to update it in the future if ithas an expiring free usage date. --Joseph Slater 23:38, 21 December 2010 (UTC)
  • I hadn't noticed TeXmaker had such an extensive write-up but I still think the page is unhelpful if one wants to compare front ends. --CFR 21:22, 21 December 2010 (UTC)
    • I agree. I don't think a complete comparison can ever be made. Just a brief introduction. --Joseph Slater 23:38, 21 December 2010 (UTC)
• The description of TeXShop suggests that TeXShop requires TeX Live. As far as I know this is false. TeXShop requires a TeX distribution and it works out of the box with TeX Live but it will, as I understand it, work equally well with any TeX distribution. But I hesitate to alter this without being certain... I think the integrated description of TeX Live given here is unfortunate since it may suggest that the wonders of TeX Live are somehow provided by TeXShop when all these goodies are available with TeX Live regardless of choice of editor/front end. I know the description is fairly clear if you already have a firm grasp of the distribution vs. editor/front end distinction, but I think it might well be much less clear to somebody new to the TeX world - somebody accustomed to word processors, say, where the goodies like fonts really are part of the single package.
  • Clearly that needs correction too... you've been busy. I would hope users would start making such minor edits. --Joseph Slater 23:38, 21 December 2010 (UTC)
• I'm not sure about any of this else I'd be changing stuff rather than talking about it but looking at this page, I don't think it would help me make a well-informed decision and it might be rather less helpful than a bare list of links would be since those would at least not mislead me.
• What do people think? --CFR 21:13, 21 December 2010 (UTC)
  • I think a brief introduction with a key relatively unique feature is what is reasonable. Enough for the reader to surmise if they are interested in trying it. --Joseph Slater 23:38, 21 December 2010 (UTC)

Two additions:

• Is Scientific Assistant no more? Or is there a new link?
  • I thought it was dead, but may be wrong. --Joseph Slater 23:38, 21 December 2010 (UTC)
• The write-up for LyX is very misleading. It emphasises why one might choose LyX rather than a word processor but not why one might choose LyX as a front end for TeX, given that one had already decided to use TeX. --CFR 21:22, 21 December 2010 (UTC)
  • Good point. I have no disagreement with anything you've said. I would probably have made these corrections if I wasn't otherwise overwhelmed. (still working on a report due in September!)--Joseph Slater 23:38, 21 December 2010 (UTC)