Article View: comp.editors
Article #1298Re: vi Alternative Required (long posting)
From: Eoin Woods
Date: Thu, 06 Dec 1990 09:02
Date: Thu, 06 Dec 1990 09:02
55 lines
3208 bytes
3208 bytes
joshi@cs.uiuc.edu (Anil Joshi) writes:
^
.
. Deleted Stuff
.
v
>May be you used the older version. IBM keeps on making improvements in a
>systematic way and documents everything. There is strict QC and you can
>be more or less assured about its reliability.
Agreed!
>What do vi and emacs
>have to offer in this area? Am I wrong in assuming that
>they have been basically developed by some grad. students?
Yes!
>I also have a
>feeling that some of the computer science hacks are too caught up in
>their own little hacking tricks like named pipes or whatever and
>sneer at the users. Do you think that they would care too much about the
>poor typist/sceretary who has to use these tools? Now, on the otherhand,
>if they were to make money, they would put everything they have got into
>it. The popularity of emacs arises from it being a free-bee package than
>anything else. If one was paying some good $s for it, one would demand
>more. IBM sells ISPF for real $s and they spend enough money on
>research and continually improve their products. This is true with any
>company (be it Apple or DEC etc.).
I think that this is a little unfair - GNU Emacs is produced by the Free
Software Foundation (FSF) - No there are no guarantees, but then as it
is distributed free it really isn't possible to give any for economic reasons.
Yes, I do believe that Richard Stallman et al DO care about their end user,
but it is worth remembering that the end user intended for Emacs (and indeed
Vi) is a PROGRAMMER - not a typist.
FSF do put 'everything they have got' into the GNU tools that they produce,
because that is basically all that they do - The low number of problems
reported over USENET seem imply that FSF do have a working quality assurance
policy (although I personally doubt whether it is as formal as all that).
Just a few thoughts!
Eoin.
PS - As Peter Da Silva said in a few postings back - Why not write a PD
editor that is focused towards typists/end users rather than programmers.
FSF are you listening?? :-)
--
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
~ Eoin Woods, Software Development Group, Bull HN Information Systems, ~
~ Maxted Road, Hemel Hempstead, Herts HP2 7DZ ~
~ Tel : +44 442 232222 x4823 ~
~ Fax : +44 442 234084 ~
~ < Eoin.Woods@hemel.bull.co.uk > ~
~ < When do we start news group comp.os.emacs ? :-) > ~
Technical Details
Message-ID:
<1990Dec6.090226.3647@hemel.bull.co.uk>Path:
arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!usc!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!know!pluto.hemel.bull.co.uk!ewoodsReferences:
<1616@ukpoit.co.uk> <109752@convex.convex.com> <joshi.660338789@m.cs.uiuc.edu> <1005@langtry.cs.utexas.edu> <joshi.660440350@m.cs.uiuc.edu>Show Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!usc!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!know!pluto.hemel.bull.co.uk!ewoods From: ewoods@hemel.bull.co.uk (Eoin Woods) Newsgroups: comp.editors Subject: Re: vi Alternative Required (long posting) Message-ID: <1990Dec6.090226.3647@hemel.bull.co.uk> Date: 6 Dec 90 09:02:26 GMT References: <1616@ukpoit.co.uk> <109752@convex.convex.com> <joshi.660338789@m.cs.uiuc.edu> <1005@langtry.cs.utexas.edu> <joshi.660440350@m.cs.uiuc.edu> Sender: @hemel.bull.co.uk Organization: Bull HN UK Lines: 55 Nntp-Posting-Host: brno