[kirillbobyrev]

This looks nice but I can't what the target audience and intended usage patterns are. It's somewhere between

1. "simple text editor to use on servers/whenever I need to edit something quickly". That place is taken by nano that is easy enough so that people don't have to learn it, or vim for those who mastered it. In this niche it's important for the editor to be ubiquitous enough and present even on the old machines.

2. Regular day-to-day code editor. Micro has _some_ autocompletion, syntax highlighting etc. But for a modern editor to function, it really needs an LSP client implementation. But this seems to not be happening so far: https://github.com/zyedidia/micro/issues/1138

Micro has some features in each bucket (simplicity, ease of usage vs. IDE-like features) but does not seem to really excel at either.

[makeworld]

I use Micro as a better Nano. The syntax highlighting is better, the copy pasting is better, and most of all, the key bindings are the ones I'm used to. I can use Nano fine, but Micro is much more intuitive.

[mixmastamyk]

It runs everywhere and uses keybindings available everywhere else. It’s not an IDE. Basically can take over all simple to medium editing tasks. i.e. a no-brainer.

[kortex]

> In this niche it's important for the editor to be ubiquitous enough and present even on the old machines.

Why are people still treating this like a deal breaker? It's a static go binary, if I can ssh to it, I can scp micro to it, or more typically just curl the latest release from GitHub into ~/.local/bin (no sudo!). Just like you'd do with your vimrc.

Apparently this is controversial.

[kirillbobyrev]

Because sometimes I can't download binaries from the internet and sometimes... well, I don't have the internet! One scenario for the latter is installing an OS from scratch.

One might call me lazy but I don't want to end up learning multiple editors for different scenarios if the benefits are marginal, especially if I can get away with just one!