Path: utzoo!utgpu!watmath!att!rutgers!ucsd!usc!samsung!uunet!crdgw1!crdos1!davidsen
From: davidsen@crdos1.crd.ge.COM (Wm E Davidsen Jr)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.questions
Subject: Re: vi editor enhancement request
Keywords: vi display emacs
Message-ID: <1634@crdos1.crd.ge.COM>
Date: 16 Nov 89 21:30:36 GMT
References: <456@tron.UUCP> <5530@ethz-inf.UUCP> <20668@unix.cis.pitt.edu> <15948@bloom-beacon.MIT.EDU>
Reply-To: davidsen@crdos1.UUCP (bill davidsen)
Organization: GE Corp R&D Center, Schenectady NY
Lines: 19

In article <15948@bloom-beacon.MIT.EDU> jik@athena.mit.edu (Jonathan I. Kamens) writes:

| 2. Why is emacs more universal than vi, if emacs is NOT shipped by
|    default with most Unix systems, while vi IS shipped by default with
|    most (if not all -- anybody here work on a system that doesn't have
|    vi :-) Unix systems?

  emacs is more universal because it is on more types of systems. If you
are operating in a very sheltered environment which is UNIX only you
don't care, but having portable p.d. version of emacs makes it more
widely available.

  This should not be confused with a claim that available=better, just
an explanation of propigation in the real world.
-- 
bill davidsen	(davidsen@crdos1.crd.GE.COM -or- uunet!crdgw1!crdos1!davidsen)
"The world is filled with fools. They blindly follow their so-called
'reason' in the face of the church and common sense. Any fool can see
that the world is flat!" - anon