[buro9]

I wanted a default tool I could find and use on any machine I connected to. vim is always there, even on servers.

I wanted something I could use over SSH, even on really bad connections such as mobile. vim works great over poor connections.

I barely use plugins, and seldom configure syntax highlighting.

On the desktop I may use vim, but tend to use Sublime Text for everything. Go, Java, HTML, CSS, JavaScript (node and browser)... Sublime Text serves me really well and works the way I want to work. Before Sublime Text I was 100% vim, after Sublime Text I'm 80/20 ST/vim.

But for whenever there isn't ST, vim is always there.

[davidw]

> vim is always there, even on servers.

This argument made sense 20 years ago, when it was quite possible that you'd fine yourself on some weird IRIX machine that had nothing much installed, but you could be sure vi was there.

These days, apt-get install emacs or the redhat equivalent is not really a problem.

> I wanted something I could use over SSH,

Emacs has a remote connection mode, so that you fetch the file, edit it locally, and then save it to the remote machine.

[buro9]

It still applies, servers I connect to tend to be locked enough that users are unable to install stuff. The user (me) would need to get a ticket opened to have it added to the config, whereas vim is already there.

And on the latter, if the issue is a live server needing immediate attention and a config change, and I'm mobile and using my Android device and have the rights to edit a file and the access certificate locally I could just do it in vim in moments over SSH. Whereas I've no clue as to what app I'd need to install on my phone to act as a passable editor for the file, and why retrieve a whole file (potentially large config) when you just want to make a one-line change? vim just works for my use-case, no config required, no local app required, just edit the file, save it, test and be done.

Both of those solutions just feel clunky, why fight to use Emacs when you could just use vim? Hence, I just use vim, it works, I'm happy as the job is done.

[laumars]

> Both of those solutions just feel clunky

They're not any clunkier than the solutions you were preferring. I think what's happened here is that you've found a solution that works for you and your happy with. Which is fine. But you're then trying to rationalize why your solution is "better" when really your solution is just personal preference.

However with that all said and done, I'm a vi use myself. I've never seen the point of learning emacs because I like vi, I'm quick in vi and I'm happy with vi. But if I'd learned emacs before I learned vi, then I'm sure I'd be saying the same thing but :%s/vi/emacs/g

[hazov]

I for one wanted to do some tedious non automatable box editing over ssh, emacs have a default extension (mode?) to do this which did not worked in the terminal, tried some quick stuff on config, did not work. Every page I found on how to fix the stuff forced me to read for more time than I had to do the task, I just did it with vim.

I'm just trying to learn some emacs and although I see its value, the emacs experience is not for me, my vimrc is like every other config file that I have, a bare minimum. People who use emacs generally tweak the editor with thousand of lines of elisp.