Xref: utzoo comp.editors:2162 comp.unix.questions:27434
Path: utzoo!censor!geac!torsqnt!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!wuarchive!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!think.com!mintaka!bloom-beacon!eru!hagbard!sunic!mcsun!ukc!edcastle!simon
From: simon@castle.ed.ac.uk (Simon Brown)
Newsgroups: comp.editors,comp.unix.questions
Subject: Re: vi Alternative Required
Message-ID: <7471@castle.ed.ac.uk>
Date: 6 Dec 90 16:38:33 GMT
References: <1616@ukpoit.co.uk>
Organization: Meiko Ltd.
Lines: 29

In article <1616@ukpoit.co.uk> ian@ukpoit.co.uk (Ian Spare) writes:
>
>Some of our users/developers have formed a lynch party and came into the
>tech support area this morining spoiling for a fight !!! They ( not me ! )
>feel that vi is hopeless and would like a better editor ( their words ).
>
>I think the problem is that they find productivity plumments when using 
>3 editors , namely vi , wordstar and IBM ISPF editors.

silly remark #1:
    yeah, it's probably best to try to stick to one at a time. maybe two...

>
>What I think I need is a new editor for them , these are the requirements :
>         2 . Look and feel the same as either Wordstar or IBM ISPF editor.

silly remark #2:
    but didn't they just say that these are the other ones that make their 
    productivity plummet? maybe they meant "look and feel *not* the same as
    ..." - a rather more likely request, i can't help thinking :-)
   
	--Simon

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Simon Brown                                                   simon@meiko.co.uk
Meiko Scientific Ltd.                                         simon@uk.ac.ed
(Edinburgh Office, Edinburgh Parallel Computing Centre)

#include <stddisclaimer.h>