Talk:Editor war
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Editor war article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. | |||
|
| Article policies | |
Find sources: Google (books · news · newspapers · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · NYT · TWL | |||
Archives: Index, 1 | |||
This article was nominated for deletion on October 7, 2007. The result of the discussion was Keep. |
This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Index 1 |
Threads older than 1 year may be automatically archived by lowercase sigmabot III. |
What about joe?[edit]
Emacs and vi are not the only popular editors. There is a significant "joe" (Joe's Own Editor) camp for those who dislike vi (and believe it to be a glorified version of ed/edlin), and may have cut their teeth on non-unix style text editors such as the IDE's of Borland's Turbo C or Pasal, or MicroPro's WordStar editor under CP/M or MS-DOS. --Thoric 16:19, 1 June 2006 (UTC)
- There are zillions of text editors out there, the comp.sources.unix moderator at one point refused to post new editors for that reason.
- The Editor War refers to a clash between two of those, that happened to be the most popular with the early Usenet crowd.
- WordStar would be a word-processor, not a text editor.--Per Abrahamsen 18:03, 1 June 2006 (UTC)
- Actually, this article would do well to have a flat statement like: While the "editor war" between emacs and vi remains relevant for many older users, most new users will look at either in complete disgust or horror and will continue to search for "a proper editor" which is easier to use by default. Menus and common hotkey combinations are common arguments for avoiding those two editors, even though they both could be customised to become friendlier. Common alternates include nano/pico, joe and a small handful of others (very small). Many users will reach for GUI editors whenever possible, most of which are much more "sane" in the eyes of these users. -- Sy / (talk) 13:41, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
- I don't think that this is a good idea. This is about vi vs emacs, not about text editors in general. --Apyule 14:48, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
- Actually the article's name is Editor wars, not vi vs emacs. I believe a reference to other editors wouldn't hurt, although it would seem important to note that the canonical example of editor wars is indeed emacs vs vi (which would lead nicely into the rest of the article as it is now). I would not, however, agree with the example given by Sy above. "complete disgust or horror" does not seem like the sort of term we should be using on an enciclopedic article (and is subjective to begin with), "easier to use" is subjective, and I'm not at all convinced that emacs and vi are only relevant for older users. Capi 03:42, 15 June 2006 (UTC)
- I have to agree here; I'm a young guy, and I am interested in both editors (haven't made a choice yet) because I think they are both going to be more powerful than most of what else is out there in the long run. I think many people especially in the development community agree. 128.113.147.60
- If you want the power of emacs, but were brought up on OSX or XP/Vista/Win7/Win8, there is a distro called ErgoEmacs. See also the distro Cream, on top of vim. 74.192.84.101 (talk) 13:30, 19 September 2013 (UTC)
- I have to agree here; I'm a young guy, and I am interested in both editors (haven't made a choice yet) because I think they are both going to be more powerful than most of what else is out there in the long run. I think many people especially in the development community agree. 128.113.147.60
- Actually the article's name is Editor wars, not vi vs emacs. I believe a reference to other editors wouldn't hurt, although it would seem important to note that the canonical example of editor wars is indeed emacs vs vi (which would lead nicely into the rest of the article as it is now). I would not, however, agree with the example given by Sy above. "complete disgust or horror" does not seem like the sort of term we should be using on an enciclopedic article (and is subjective to begin with), "easier to use" is subjective, and I'm not at all convinced that emacs and vi are only relevant for older users. Capi 03:42, 15 June 2006 (UTC)
- I don't think that this is a good idea. This is about vi vs emacs, not about text editors in general. --Apyule 14:48, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
- Actually, this article would do well to have a flat statement like: While the "editor war" between emacs and vi remains relevant for many older users, most new users will look at either in complete disgust or horror and will continue to search for "a proper editor" which is easier to use by default. Menus and common hotkey combinations are common arguments for avoiding those two editors, even though they both could be customised to become friendlier. Common alternates include nano/pico, joe and a small handful of others (very small). Many users will reach for GUI editors whenever possible, most of which are much more "sane" in the eyes of these users. -- Sy / (talk) 13:41, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
Current?? state of the editor war[edit]
The section headed "Current state of the editor war seems to refer largely to 1999. That's not really current at the time of writing (2014). Perhaps it ought to be renamed or updated? -- Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:630:D0:F111:BDB8:5CD6:8D81:39B8 (talk) 08:59, 26 June 2014 (UTC)
- My impression is that standalone (un-integrated) plaintext editor programs have declined in practical importance over the last 15 years. They still have their advocates, are often included in standard software distributions, and are essential for certain highly-specialized tasks, but purely pragmatic programmers (who weren't necessarily around in the 1990s, and use whatever tool helps them code fastest) often don't use them... AnonMoos (talk) 03:44, 27 June 2014 (UTC)
- WP:OR... Huihermit (talk) 05:41, 27 June 2014 (UTC)
- And short-sighted. Whatever fad languages these IDEs are integrated with won't necessarily be the best choice in 10 years. And the "pragmatic" programmers will have to learn another editor, along with another language.-- Preceding unsigned comment added by OMPIRE (talk o contribs) 14:09, 16 September 2014 (UTC)
- WP:OR... Huihermit (talk) 05:41, 27 June 2014 (UTC)
2020[edit]
Modes 2[edit]
- Editor_war#Benefits_of_Emacs says "Emacs has a non-modal interface", but there was an argument elsewhere about the modes (which is calls modes) and quasi-modes of Emacs.
- Editor_war#Benefits_of_vi-like_editors says "Vi has a modal interface (which Emacs can emulate)", but it is not clear from that section why it could be an advantage.
Both are clarified in several parts of the table in Editor_war#Differences_between_Emacs_and_vi, mentioning how Emacs modes are different from "modal interface", and how vi is more ergonomic than Emacs with modern keyboards (Editor_war#Humor mentions carpal tunnel syndrome as a joke subject though). Maybe the benefits sections could reference it. --AVRS (talk) 00:02, 22 January 2016 (UTC)
The Other Editor War[edit]
Interesting that there doesn't seem to exist any article about the other editor war : The "Wordprocessor War" between MS Word and WordPerfect. It almost sounds as if the Editor War described here was so much more important that no-one thought of making an Wikipedia article on that other Editor war, cynically speaking ... Alrik Fassbauer (talk) 12:28, 5 August 2017 (UTC)
- It was a well-known issue among various groups of computer programmers during most of the 1980s and 1990s (including programmers who were likely to be connected to the early Internet and shape early Internet culture), and it only slowly trailed off. By contrast, MS-Word vs. WordPerfect was a struggle between commercial corporations (not ordinary users), and MS-Word crushed WordPerfect fairly quickly after Windows and office-suite bundling began to catch on... AnonMoos (talk) 02:25, 6 August 2017 (UTC)
- C-Class Computing articles
- Low-importance Computing articles
- C-Class software articles
- Low-importance software articles
- All Software articles
- C-Class software articles of Low-importance
- C-Class Free and open-source software articles
- Mid-importance Free and open-source software articles
- All Free and open-source software articles
- C-Class Free and open-source software articles of Low-importance
- All Computing articles
- C-Class Linux articles
- Low-importance Linux articles
- WikiProject Linux articles
No comments:
Post a Comment