'vi' is driving me crazy

[Alma J Wetzker]

Collins Richey wrote:
> On Tue, 28 Dec 2004 09:01:50 -0800, Net Llama! <netllama at linux-sxs.org> wrote:
> 
>>On 12/28/2004 08:38 AM, A. Khattri wrote:
>>
>>>On Tue, 28 Dec 2004, Michael Hipp wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>What I was attempting to do is explain that there *are* such things as
>>>>"standard" keystrokes for editors. That there is value in such. And I'd
>>>>like to find an editor that allowed me to continue to use them from the
>>>>command line.
>>>
>>>
>>>Of course, CTRL C would be unworkable as a copy keystroke on the
>>>command-line...
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>You, on the other hand, just prefer to continually insinuate that I'm
>>>>just to dumb, lazy or lame to learn to love vi.
>>>
>>>
>>>No, we just want you to quit the whining...
>>
>>Whining?  Get off your high horse.  No one voted you $DEITY's gift to Linux.
>>
> 
> 
> Doncha just love a good flame war! 
> 
> There's been plenty of whining in this thread, and not all from one
> source. To summarize again (see approx. 50 posts earlier in the
> thread): some like vi, some don't. It's not insinuating anything to
> point out how useful vi can be. It's also not insinuating anything to
> report the obvious: vi doesn't follow the [sacred and beloved of many]
> cut and paste standards used by most gui editors.
> 
> There are plenty of high horses to go around.
> 

This looks to me like the baby duck syndrome, the first large object seen is 
the mommy.  I worked with someone that went ballistic when a simpler 
alternative to what he wanted to do came up.  His comment was, "I just spent a 
year learning how to make this work, I am not about to learn something 
different now!"  I couldn't help thinking, "How do you expect to survive in 
this industry?"  (I later found out, he went to work for Micro$oft.)

Those who started on the *nix side of things seem to want to use vi, because 
it runs everywhere.  (I think that means, on most servers.)  Those who started 
on micro's want some sort of standard that works on 90+% of the computers out 
there.  Both don't want to change what they already know.  I think that is the 
reason for the localized myopia.  Everyone can see why they shouldn't change 
but can't quite grasp any arguments in favor of change.  (From my perspective 
both arguments are equally valid and have equal weight, though I tend to side 
with the ditch vi crowd.)

Am I the only one seeing the irrationality inherent in both sides of this 
particular thread?

     -- Alma