Return to BSD News archive
Path: euryale.cc.adfa.oz.au!newshost.carno.net.au!harbinger.cc.monash.edu.au!munnari.OZ.AU!news.ecn.uoknor.edu!news.wildstar.net!news.ececs.uc.edu!news.kei.com!news.thenet.net!uunet!not-for-mail From: mail25193@pop.net (Fred Trottelhauer) Newsgroups: comp.os.linux.misc,comp.os.linux.networking,comp.os.linux.setup,comp.unix.bsd.bsdi.misc,comp.unix.bsd.misc,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy Subject: Re: Betting on Unix Date: 3 Mar 1997 04:18:57 GMT Lines: 73 Message-ID: <5fdjfh$duk@news0-alterdial.uu.net> References: <5d3sr2$44n@nntp1.best.com> <5ddcvf$4dh@sun20.ccd.bnl.gov> <330a1d23.2419719@172.15.0.208> <5ef5c8$rgs@arktur.rz.uni-ulm.de> <5f6fhq$el0@faculty.ed.umuc.edu> Reply-To: mail25193@pop.net NNTP-Posting-Host: cust33.max45.new-york.ny.ms.uu.net X-Newsreader: IBM NewsReader/2 v1.2.5 Xref: euryale.cc.adfa.oz.au comp.os.linux.misc:162232 comp.os.linux.networking:70558 comp.os.linux.setup:100515 comp.unix.bsd.bsdi.misc:6168 comp.unix.bsd.misc:2688 comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy:55337 comp.os.os2.advocacy:271002 In <5f6fhq$el0@faculty.ed.umuc.edu>, rshecter@faculty.ed.umuc.edu (Robb Shecter) writes: >In article <5ef5c8$rgs@arktur.rz.uni-ulm.de>, >Stephan Pfab <pfab@mathematik.uni-ulm.de> wrote: >>edward@islandnet.com wrote: >> >>: emacs is also nearly as bad as vi(le), and latex.. well enough said, >>: you need a Masters in Computer Science just to understand >>: the bloody thing (which I incidently have, yet still don't!) >> >>This has to be a troll. >>I mean a "Microsoft Certified Systems Engineer" who can't figure out >>emacs or latex; surprise. If the shoe fits... >There's something being missed here, though: Ancient programs like vi >and emacs that require the user to memorize a million keystrokes are just >too hard to use. I'd say there's only a marginal difference between them and any other editor I've ever seen - at the 'power user' stage, all of them have a set of key sequences which you use in order to perform tasks, and which you don't think about when you use them. Whether I move with Alt-l<cursor>Alt-m, <click and hold>DEL<mouse><click> or dd<cursor>p, after a while, my usage settles down to the same level of minor thought, or none at all. Practice creates a near- direct association between the task you want to do, and the physical actions needed to accomplish it. Remembering complex sequences at a high-conscious level is just gravy on top of the set of task-action pairings that you use to get through your day. Ease of learning, or volume of information you're required to make automatic, may be higher, but only in a marginal way. >[...] >After all, these editors are the means, not the end. They should be >blindingly easy to use, like a Windows program. Why do I say that? Because >I know how to change the Paragraph xyz setting in MS Word 2.0: You go to >the Format Paragraph menu and it'll be there. If not, then you can't >change it. The scenario you describe here at the end is familiar... You sell off power for your ease of use. >This is the equivalent to doing math by remembering the theory, or ideas >behind something: There's no way one can remember all the formulas one's >ever been taught. If you know some basic substitutions, though, they >can be reconstructed. To truly make use of that sort of training, you do need to have available as much of that sort of knowledge as you can manage. I think you're talking about an everyday-needs kind of usage where you don't want to remember the whole year's course content; it's surprising how soon first principles start coming in handy, though. >Emacs, vi & kin are asking us to do the equivalent of memorizing everything >we've ever learned, word for word. Maybe if we've actually 'learned' it, we have memorized it, maybe not word-for-word, but maybe in a similar, equally useful form. What is your intuition made of ? I think your point is that vi & co. provide an arcane interface which isn't optimal for quick acquisition; my response is that in terms of what you need to acquire in terms of information about new tasks, the difference from the phabulous gooeyies and any other editor (I've ever seen) is marginal at best. BTW, I wanted to ask the weenie who wrote 'Vi rulz' why in God's name he would want to bother getting a version for NT ? Fred When I hear the words 'Connected', 'Trust' and 'Under Control', I reach for my revolver.