Stop Microsoft
Operating Systems => Linux and UNIX => Topic started by: ReggieMicheals on 16 December 2005, 02:06
-
I'm Emacs all the way...
-
I'm Emacs all the way...
w00t!
I predict vim will win the poll (EDIT: whoops, I thought it was just vim and emacs.), it seems to be more popular.
I used to use it all the time (with a bit of gedit and KDevelop.), but then I took the time to learn Emacs and I love it. I still use vim just to change stuff really fast when I'm in a terminal in X (because Emacs would bring up the GUI. I could get around that by running "DISPLAY= emacs" (is there another/better way?), but I don't have a problem with using vim.), that's it.
-
At a big forum, this poll would be just asking for trouble. :p
I don't program so I'm fine with editors such as TextEdit and GEdit. However, I'd use Vim over Emacs most of the time. The only time I use Emacs is for the Psychaiatrist feature. ;)
-
Nano/pico.
I like simplicity and intuitiveness.
-
Notepad 2 & Emacs
-
I have to say Vim, best command line tool I have used so far. ;)
-
clearly vim, or some type of vi
the reason i say this is you know it will be installed. if i log into a shell account, it's not likely to have emacs on it, but you know vi will be there.
i used to be a real emacs advocate but i have to say for a text editor, vim edits text. it's a steep curve to start with, but so is emacs.
having said that, for beginners, pico and nano are great and so is jmacs and jpico
-
Kwrite\Kdevelop and nano
-
vi*
just because that's what know. To be perfectly honest, I don't think I've ever used any other command-line text editor.
As far as non-commandline stuff, I like gedit, it works for me.
-
I actually use nano in console and vim in X for editing HTML or CSS.
-
Emacs. Pico/nano are close seconds... but using vi/vim is just a very frustrating experience for me and always has been.
-
actually (and i know this is pedantic) but vi isn't a command line text editor. ed is a command line text editor, however vi is a text based graphical text editor.
i know it's really pedantic but somehow i couldn't stop myself from mentioning it!
-
Like edlin which isn't included in MS-DOS 5 to Windows ME but it was re-introduced in Windows 2000 and XP for some reason. :D
-
vi is okay once you get the hang of the basics, but sometimes when I'm doing something really simple, I like the unix "edit", which is simlar to DOS "edit".
-
Aloone, Edlin was always part of Windows NT.
-
Like edlin which isn't included in MS-DOS 5 to Windows ME
Eh? I'm pretty sure it's there. I don't have any DOS 5.0 disks to check, but my manual for it describes Edlin in excruciating detail.
-
I was an emacs user, but I use vim now, or just TextEdit.
-
actually (and i know this is pedantic) but vi isn't a command line text editor. ed is a command line text editor, however vi is a text based graphical text editor.
How about we just say "non-X editor"?
-
Eh? I'm pretty sure it's there. I don't have any DOS 5.0 disks to check, but my manual for it describes Edlin in excruciating detail.
I'm sure it was missing in DOS 6, 6.22, on second thoughts I don't really know about Windows 9x I just assumed because it wasn't present in DOS 6.x it was absent in Win 9x.
-
I just use nano, the only thing I really used it for was editing /etc/apt/sources.list on some ancient computer that couldn't even run xdm. Either that or editing .bash_profile to run DarwinPorts.
-
EMACS most of the time, and vim/pico/nano for those jobs where X isn't running. Although vim does have the convert to hex feature that's handy to have.
-
i wonder why nobody voted for DOS edit yet
that's actually misleading, since the versions of edit for DR-DOS, MSDOS and FreeDOS, while similar, are noticeably different. i prefer edit.com from DR-DOS to edit.exe from MSDOS for instance. However the FreeDOS version (which is functionally the same as the MS one) is totally open source.
but i prefer vim, and would make sure it was also installed on any DOS system i (for goodness knows what reason) might have
-
i wonder why nobody voted for DOS edit yet
Probably because this is Microsuck and when you mention DOS edit people automatically think of MS-DOS edit which is M$ and it sucks anyhow.
-
vi or pico or something. Its closer to the bare minimum you need to edit a text file.
emacs is just bloat. There is a mini version but no one uses that ...
-
if you want to use emacs, i found there are some good clones of it around, which are a lot smaller, and they have most of the functionality of emacs as a text editor, my favourites were jove, jmacs and i had one on a DOS machine called freemacs, not sure if that was based on the real emacs or if it was an open source clone, but it was a good one to have installed on a DOS machine.
-
vi or pico or something. Its closer to the bare minimum you need to edit a text file.
emacs is just bloat. There is a mini version but no one uses that ...
Not really. When doing programming, it's very convenient to be able to have everything right there, as opposed to having another desktop open and switching back and forth to edit and compile. For just plain old text editing, I prefer JEdit.
-
Pico all the way. If I need more time to type commands for a fucking editor than to write a shell script, there is something very wrong there.
I use Vi only when I dont have any other editor.
I never used emacs and I have no interest in learning it.
-
If I need more time to type commands for a fucking editor than to write a shell script, there is something very wrong there.
Damn right there is!
-
I keep a copy of GNU Emacs on my flash drive, because all the good computers I can use are stuck with Winshit. I'd actually prefer an emacs-type editor in Perl (If no one else has made it I will)
I hate vim. vim sucks almost as much dick as microcrap.
Ed is too terse and unusable
vi is good, but I prefer Emacs.
Besides, I usually stay on the console and don't touch X unless I need to.
Edit? Don't make me laugh. Never touch it.
Nano/pico? Maybe good, I've never tried it.
-
I keep a copy of GNU Emacs on my flash drive, because all the good computers I can use are stuck with Winshit. I'd actually prefer an emacs-type editor in Perl (If no one else has made it I will)
I hate vim. vim sucks almost as much dick as microcrap.
Ed is too terse and unusable
vi is good, but I prefer Emacs.
Besides, I usually stay on the console and don't touch X unless I need to.
Edit? Don't make me laugh. Never touch it.
Nano/pico? Maybe good, I've never tried it.
If im on a console i always use nano, way better then vi
and under x... kwrite\kdevelop :D
-
I love nano, vim is also a great editor. I can't stand emacs. All I really want is a simple text editor, and vim and nano fill that need. I don't need all of emacs' fancy features, if I want to run a word processor, I'll get OpenOffice or iWork going.
-
My favourite editor is notepad2, the syntax and controls are just perfect. with metapath its very nice to use on projects (think kate).
it works with wine but I don't have that on my laptop and so I've been using nedit which is close to perfect.
-
Vi is a pretty good text editor, but not UNIX n00b freindly
eMacs is a pretty good text editor, but not very simplistic.
I haven't tried any other *NIX text editors after using BeOS.
MS-DOS Editor is a pretty good. It can open multiple documents, auto tabs in the next line if you tabbed the current line. Easy to use GUI-like interface without the need to memorise any commands. Easy to the n00b. Probably one of the best editors if you're using windows/DOS and could care less about syntax hilighting. Sure, MS Edit is similar to notepad, but has many more features.
-
I don't know if I agree, MS-DOS Edit is shit because it doesn't support the UNIX format and it's worse than notepad because you can't drag and drop text, word wrap or load large files. I actually quite like Gedit which comes with Gnome, it's both fast and simple.
-
Opinion is opinion, thats what polls are usually for...
-
I don't know if I agree, MS-DOS Edit is shit because it doesn't support the UNIX format
Incorrect, from what I've seen.
you can't drag and drop text,
You can Copy/Paste, though.
word wrap
Darn....
or load large files.
Yes it can. At least starting with Windows 95.
-
I was wrong about it not being compatable with UNIX, just just assumed it wasn't compatable as there's no "save in UNIX format" option.
However it does limit of 65,280 lines.
(http://www.illhostit.com/files/4955677248076029/edit.GIF)
Windows XP notepad doesn't have this problem, anyway Notepad2 is my favourite Windows text editor. For MS-DOS which I only use in emulation ntvdm, DOXBox or DOSEmu I use FreeDOS Edit as it's convenient to acces via the DOS commandline.
-
The first program I add to any Windows installation I have to use is EditPad Lite. As far as graphical text editors go, that one is pretty awesome. And, it's postcard-ware.
-
VI is teh fucking DEVIL incarnate! -i- What the hell?!
I have to press "I" to begin a session and 'insert'?!?! EXCUSE ME?! What in God's name is up with that?
:scared:
-
no, you don't have to, you can just start typing. And that's better than some random metakey combination?
-
... :confused: you can just start typing in vi??? How? I always have had to press the "i" key before I could edit anything -for example my fstab in the last Slack system I installed-
-
the Darwin version doesn't require that.
-
Are you running Darwin/GNU or just OS X?... If you're running Darwin/GNU are you running it on x86 architecture? If you are how is it? hehe
-
OS X on PPC. It rocks.
-
w00t!
I predict vim will win the poll (EDIT: whoops, I thought it was just vim and emacs.), it seems to be more popular.
I used to use it all the time (with a bit of gedit and KDevelop.), but then I took the time to learn Emacs and I love it. I still use vim just to change stuff really fast when I'm in a terminal in X (because Emacs would bring up the GUI. I could get around that by running "DISPLAY= emacs" (is there another/better way?), but I don't have a problem with using vim.), that's it.
Oh, I don't use emacs anymore. It's a fine text editor if you keep using it. I used it while I was learning it, and loved it, but now I could hardly make my way around it. Heh. I don't use text-based editors much at all, and vim works just as well and is easy to learn, and remember (the basic functionality anyhow).
I do my programming in the KDE kate (http://www.kate-editor.org/), and I really, really love it. I'm finally getting to appreciate it's split-window functionality, and it's all just goddamn brilliant. screenshot (http://piratepenguin.is-a-geek.com/~declan/crap/kate-split.png)
It's kinda like emacs, but I can sing praises for it without having the manual open..