On Sun, 24 Aug 2014 00:56:11 +1000 Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.pyt...@pearwood.info> wrote:
> Despite my comments, I don't actually have any objection to people who > choose to use Emacs, or Vim, or edit their text files by poking the hard > drive platter with a magnetised needle if they prefer :-) But I do think > it's silly of them to claim that Emacs has no learning curve, or to fail to > recognise how unfamiliar and different the UIs are compared to nearly > everything else a computer user is likely to be familiar with in 2014. Really, they don't! At least not for the people, for whom they are necessary tools. When I started in my present job, "remote access" was a dial-up modem, that could do 2400 baud, if you were lucky[1]. With such a shitty connection, a text-only editor is indisputably the right thing. Curiously enough, even today the same lousy kind of connections prevail. We still have a sizeable modem bank at my job. We still do our remote support over a telnet/ssh session. And we still are unable to reliable get the connection speeds[2], that would make anything with a GUI remotely pleasant. So emacs and vim still have their niches. Those of us, who are old enough to have started our first job in a glorified teletype, OR have to support systems that are only reachable over RFC-1149 quality datalinks, belong there. The rest of you would probably be better off with something nicer. 1. Meaning a real switched landline all the way from Denmark to Tokyo. Ending up with two satellite up/down-links was a killer. 2. We have an installation in the Philippines, where we ended up installing a satellite uplink. It feels like we have doubled the connectivity of the entire Manilla area by doing so. And it's still painfully slow. -- //Wegge -- https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list