🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <1992Jul22.001153.6753@microsoft.com> alistair@microsoft.com (Alistair Banks) writes:
>In article <RFowler.282@kelvin.jpl.nasa.gov> RFowler@kelvin.jpl.nasa.gov (Robert A. Fowler) writes:
>>In article <1992Jul20.213158.17271@pony.Ingres.COM> rion@Ingres.COM (Rion Cassidy (x3357) OGT) writes:
>>
>>>In article <1992Jul14.163740.23231@hyper.hyper.com> bonneau@hyper.com (Paul Bonneau,,) writes:
>>>>
>>>>I guess this posting is really a plea to tools vendors to
>>>>*please* port VI to NT!
>>>>
>>>>cheers - Paul.
>>
>>>Yeah, right!  We've got a guy here waiting for someone to port Wordstar to NT!
>>Some people like wordprocessors that show what the control codes are, and 
>>whare the f*** they are at, as well as an easy to use max 2 key command 
>>structure with a handy numonic for most commands (unlike that OTHER one 
>>with random multi-functionkey commands).
>
>Why the swearing? Where's the debate? Let's calmly agree that
>we need all apps that have a significant user-base ported to the
>Win32 API asap to make it accessible and useful to the maximum
>number of people - we don't need one or the other, we need both, all
>
>I'd like to discourage this forum being used to debate the rights and
>wrongs of various historically successful apps
>
>-- Alistair

I was not trying to start a heated debate with this comment and hope I 
haven't hurt anybody's feelings.  I DO find it amusing that we are all
getting excited about a new OS that touts graphical interfaces, windows,
and mouse support, while some people still prefer editors that were 
created specifically for a character-based interface with no windows,
mouse, or even support for the keyboards we are all using.

I have to agree with Alistair, however. This is not the place to debate
which editor is best.  So I apologize for the original posting.

Rion