Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!mailrus!iuvax!cica!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!snorkelwacker!bloom-beacon!athena.mit.edu!jik
From: jik@athena.mit.edu (Jonathan I. Kamens)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.questions
Subject: Re: vi editor enhancement request
Keywords: vi display emacs
Message-ID: <1989Nov21.030420.9195@athena.mit.edu>
Date: 21 Nov 89 03:04:20 GMT
References: <456@tron.UUCP> <5530@ethz-inf.UUCP> <20668@unix.cis.pitt.edu> <15948@bloom-beacon.MIT.EDU> <1634@crdos1.crd.ge.COM>
Sender: news@athena.mit.edu (News system)
Reply-To: jik@athena.mit.edu (Jonathan I. Kamens)
Organization: Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Lines: 21

In article <1634@crdos1.crd.ge.COM> davidsen@crdos1.UUCP (bill davidsen) 
writes:
>  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.

  Ah, of course.... I was committing the cardinal sin of assuming that
the whole world's a Unix box :-)

  I forgot that we even have emacs on our Mac....

  However, I got the impression from the message to which I was
replying that the original poster was trying to say that emacs was
more universal *in the Unix world*, and I still maintain that that's
just not so....

Jonathan Kamens			              USnail:
MIT Project Athena				11 Ashford Terrace
jik@Athena.MIT.EDU				Allston, MA  02134
Office: 617-253-8495			      Home: 617-782-0710