Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!mnetor!seismo!think!mit-eddie!genrad!decvax!wanginst!wang!ephraim
From: ephraim@wang.UUCP (pri=8 Ephraim Vishniac x76659 ms1459)
Newsgroups: net.micro.mac,net.unix
Subject: Re: Re: Porting UNIX Applications to the Mac
Message-ID: <864@wang.UUCP>
Date: Tue, 23-Sep-86 08:15:13 EDT
Article-I.D.: wang.864
Posted: Tue Sep 23 08:15:13 1986
Date-Received: Wed, 24-Sep-86 23:40:39 EDT
References: <1572@cbdkc1.UUCP> <1091@hoptoad.uucp>
Organization: Wang Labs, Lowell MA
Lines: 24
Xref: mnetor net.micro.mac:7179 net.unix:5633

> To add to the mouse vs vi editors debate, I will tell my story.

Ditto.

> I have NEVER had ANY experience with vi removing text and doing the
> wierd things that the previous posters have stated, even when I was a
> beginner with vi. It has ALWAYS been the best editor I have used.

The problem here is that people are comparing apples and oranges.  

Everyone's using an editor called "vi".  Some satisfied users are using
it on dedicated workstations or local terminals on lightly loaded systems.
Some complainers are using it on dial-up lines or heavily loaded systems.

When I was in the latter group, I found the cursor keys virtually useless.
They send a series of characters, and vi rarely managed to buffer and
interpret the sequence correctly.  Sure enough, lines disappeared leaving
random garbage in their place.  

I've been in the former group, also (sort of): I've used Z, Manx's
vi look-alike on the Mac.  It's a 100% different experience.  If you like
keyboard-only editors, you'll love it.

So now will everybody shut up about this?