Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!mnetor!seismo!lll-crg!nike!cit-vax!elroy!smeagol!usc-oberon!sdcrdcf!ucla-cs!neptune!mujica
From: mujica@neptune.cs.ucla.edu (Sergio Mujica)
Newsgroups: net.emacs,net.lang
Subject: Re: Why emacs?
Message-ID: <1924@curly.ucla-cs.ARPA>
Date: Fri, 3-Oct-86 15:01:37 EDT
Article-I.D.: curly.1924
Posted: Fri Oct  3 15:01:37 1986
Date-Received: Mon, 6-Oct-86 18:39:28 EDT
References: <21600007@uiucuxc> <7726@sri-spam.ARPA>
Reply-To: mujica@neptune.UUCP (Sergio Mujica)
Organization: UCLA, Computer Science Dept.
Lines: 36
Xref: mnetor net.emacs:1546 net.lang:1194

In article <7726@sri-spam.ARPA> wohler@sri-spam.UUCP (Bill Wohler) writes:
>
>INTRO
>
>one gentleman (in net.emacs) asked why we use emacs, but
>there are many out there who use other editors who might
>wonder about emacs.
>
>i used vi at the university of california at davis where we
>pronounced it 'vi' with a long i, and i continued to be a
>staunch vi proponent here at sri.  well, i was introduced to
>the mh interface that gnuemacs offered and found it the
>best way to read mail, but continued to use vi for all other
>purposes.
>

I used to be very fond of vi for a long time,  then started using
emacs for the same reasons that Bill Wohler points out.

I learned how to use it,  and started tuning details, like writing
small pieces of lisp code to make life easier.

But... I missed the orthogonality and simple design of vi. I also
found that I felt more comfortable using unix to do my things.

I decided that emacs was very powerful a tool, maybe too much
even for complex tasks.  Overwhelmingly powerful!

Sooo... I returned to vi.  Using emacs for some 8 months was
very interesting, I had  a lot of fun and learned many things.
But I am using vi.


----
Sergio Mujica,   	   Computer Science Department, UCLA
mujica@cs.ucla.edu   ...!{sdcrdcf,ihnp4,trwspp,ucbvax}!ucla-cs!mujica