Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!mnetor!seismo!rochester!pt.cs.cmu.edu!cadre!pitt!darth!investor!rbp
From: rbp@investor.UUCP (Bob Peirce)
Newsgroups: net.text,net.unix
Subject: Re: Use of ``vi'' for business office word-processing
Message-ID: <793@investor.UUCP>
Date: Tue, 9-Sep-86 20:44:04 EDT
Article-I.D.: investor.793
Posted: Tue Sep  9 20:44:04 1986
Date-Received: Fri, 12-Sep-86 22:56:06 EDT
References: <1246@kitty.UUCP>
Organization: Cookson, Peirce & Co., Pittsburgh, PA
Lines: 31
Xref: mnetor net.text:966 net.unix:5459

> 	In my humble :-) opinion, I cannot think of any editor more universally
> useful than ``vi'' (yes, I know about Emacs, but I still prefer ``vi''). 
> 	So my question is: Am I WRONG in advising people to stay with ``vi''
> and not spend money for "word-processing software" in the BUSINESS APPLICATION
> environment?

I think you are absolutely right.  We tried some "word processing" packages
and without exception everyone rejected them.  They are anti-unix; they get
in your way.  We use vi/nroff with mm macros and an Informix db for mailing
lists.  Recently I have added uEmacs but so far I am the only one who loves
it.  I still use vi about half the time.  Both have strengths and unix lets
you use them.

> For three or four secretaries (and to allow
> for growth), I am inclined to recommend a 3B2 or NCR Tower XP as the most
> COST-EFFECTIVE means of implementing a multi-user system.  Comments, anyone?

Don't overlook the marvelous machine made by Altos.  We are going to a 3068
for a current staff of six and a planned future staff of 10-12.  Everybody
lives off the machine from the Chairman (me) on down.  We found two networked
68000s couldn't handle our load.  I think the M68020 is the only way to go.

> ==>  Larry Lippman @ Recognition Research Corp., Clarence, New York
-- 

	 	    Bob Peirce, Pittsburgh, PA
	    uucp: ...!{allegra, bellcore, cadre, idis}
	  	     !pitt!darth!investor!rbp
			    412-471-5320

	    NOTE:  Mail must be < 30K  bytes/message