On Thu, 06 Feb 2003 20:32:02 -0900
civileme <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> But really I have always felt trapped in these discussions.  I don't

Me too!!

> believe there is really enough common ground to compare them.  emacs
> is easier to get started with thanks to the tutorial built in, and vi
> is easier to master.  emacs is at the same time a desktop, a shell, a
> scripting host, and a basically crash-proof word processor (Yep I was
> around when computers worked with 64K memory and MINCE+SCRIBBLE /
> Final Word II/Borland's SPRINT was a going enterprise and crashes were
> frequent, and that bound me closer to emacs, cause I always forgot to
> save on WordStar).

Hell Civileme that dates us :-)) remember Wordmaster too??

Wordstar!! Now that's still my fallback for massaging large text files.

I still find it amazing that a 64k executable with overlays could handle
16mb even in the cp/m days!!

It's also the only editor (sic) I found which could move text in columnar
mode. Mind you I've never had to try this since returning to *nix.

> Besides, I have an affection for wheat on dark slate gray that always
> looks green to me... :-)

Yeah but that's to do with snow-blindnes isn't :-))

John (nz)

Want to buy your Pack or Services from MandrakeSoft? 
Go to http://www.mandrakestore.com

Reply via email to