master_coda said:
But this isn't what graphics7 said. I saw "Actually I despise emacs more than I do vim, however I consider them both terrible" followed in the next post by an assertion that the primary reason that this is because vi is more universally available.
That's where the personal preference comes in. The fact that you like being able to use the same editor on almost any system doesn't generalize to everyone else. A lot of people don't have to use systems that only have vi, and even people who do have to use such systems don't always want to restrict themselves to lowest-common-denominator tools.
Well my preference for vi is somewhat personal, yes, but it's also practical. Sometimes you might not have the option of finding/building/install Emacs on a system you're on. Emacs has a load of dependencies, whereas, vi is basically dependent on an ncurses lib and that's about it.
For people that are on one system, as you suggest, use whatever editor you like. You're only most efficient with what you like to use. I just meant that it's
highly advantageous to become proficient with an editor that is found throughout
every UNIX/free-UNIX platform, and being stuck on Emacs is sort of like being `locked-down' to a single editor.
I do quite a bit of contract work, so I never know what I'll see on UNIX systems. I do know that 'vi' will be on them, though. Usually, I don't stay on a server/workstation long enough to have the time to install/build/whatever Emacs, nor the interest. In fact, I'd be quite humiliated if I walked up to a system and found that the editor I'm dependent upon, Emacs, isn't there. What do I do? I have to waste time installing it, when I could be getting paid for the work I supposed to be doing.
