[lutusp]

> ... the editor is orders of magnitude less significant than a huge list of other things. It does not matter.

The first point is true. The second point is false -- it does matter. Saying that X is less important than Y can't be used to argue that X doesn't matter at all.

> If I am building a business or a product the last thing on my mind is what text editor we will be using. It is so ridiculously insignificant in the grand scheme of things that seeing people focus on it is beyond comprehension.

That's true in general, but there's an exception -- if you can improve the efficiency of editing, you might make a basic change in people's thinking and become a millionaire as a side effect.

Guess how I know this.

[robomartin]

I think that the value of your editor was not in efficiency --if we define it as "data entry speed". I think it had a lot more to do with a sensible user interface that was accessible and yes, "efficient", for someone --anyone-- to get into. It used that peripherals and accepted UI norms available at the time and it did so well enough to be successful.

vim is a cult based on metrics that are not significant drivers in the context of building a software product or company.

[lutusp]

> I think that the value of your editor was not in efficiency --if we define it as "data entry speed".

Oh, I agree -- based on modern standards it was quite primitive and somewhat poky when used by an experienced touch-typist. But I was only comparing it to vi. :)