[sgarland]

Legitimately asking, not trying to start a holy war - what did you find lacking in vim that you found in emacs? I've been using vim for barely a year, and have yet to find anything I can't do in it that I want to do.

[squeegee_scream]

Org mode was the biggest draw. Magit is amazing, lisp is much better than vimscript, and everything is easy to inspect and modify.

At the time I much preferred vim’s approach of being an excellent IDE. I didn’t like Emacs’ approach of being… everything. However, being able to browse the web, check email, read ebooks, use the terminal, interact with JIRA or GitHub or Notion etc etc, all within my IDE really does have its appeal.

But I’ll always love vim and nvim, I think every software developer should learn it

[hyperhopper]

If you're legitimately trying to understand, try to flip the question.

What is better about vim? Evil mode in emacs has the same keybinds you're used to. Extensibility and customization is 100x better since everything is lua, instead of trying to twist viml to do what it wasn't meant to do. Unless you just want to use base vi on every machine you ssh into, it's hard to find ways vim is better.

[sgarland]

Tbf when I said vim, in my head I meant neovim, which supports Lua. I'm aware they're quite different, and that's on me for not being specific.

My main reasoning is precisely the opposite reason as your sibling comment mentions - I have no interest in my editor supporting barely tangential things like web browsing, email, etc. The ability to spawn a terminal is nice (and mine can do so), but my terminal (Kitty) can also easily split itself and switch context between nvim/terminal so it's not critical.

[hyperhopper]

You can ignore the capabilities that you don't need. But overall as a vim lover, I find the emacs program and configuration to be far superior to [neo]vi[m]