From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Rustom Mody Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.help Subject: Re: Is Emacs very alive, active and improving? Date: Wed, 9 Oct 2013 19:28:06 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <95ce9b56-a916-4462-a04e-ba57502bfbda@googlegroups.com> References: <87pprkbodk.fsf@nl106-137-194.student.uu.se> <5d0ea74d-527c-4c19-a9d6-596bec4a4c6b@googlegroups.com> <87eh7ub5qj.fsf@nl106-137-194.student.uu.se> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1381372214 5247 80.91.229.3 (10 Oct 2013 02:30:14 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 10 Oct 2013 02:30:14 +0000 (UTC) To: help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Original-X-From: help-gnu-emacs-bounces+geh-help-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Thu Oct 10 04:30:18 2013 Return-path: Envelope-to: geh-help-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1VU613-0004sT-8b for geh-help-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Thu, 10 Oct 2013 04:30:17 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:44644 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1VU612-0002za-ON for geh-help-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Wed, 09 Oct 2013 22:30:16 -0400 X-Received: by 10.42.112.138 with SMTP id y10mr5656919icp.28.1381372087187; Wed, 09 Oct 2013 19:28:07 -0700 (PDT) X-Received: by 10.50.23.8 with SMTP id i8mr242333igf.8.1381372087135; Wed, 09 Oct 2013 19:28:07 -0700 (PDT) Original-Path: usenet.stanford.edu!a6no7652275qak.0!news-out.google.com!9ni24117qaf.0!nntp.google.com!a6no7652262qak.0!postnews.google.com!glegroupsg2000goo.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail Original-Newsgroups: gnu.emacs.help In-Reply-To: <87eh7ub5qj.fsf@nl106-137-194.student.uu.se> Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com Injection-Info: glegroupsg2000goo.googlegroups.com; posting-host=59.95.3.131; posting-account=mBpa7woAAAAGLEWUUKpmbxm-Quu5D8ui Original-NNTP-Posting-Host: 59.95.3.131 User-Agent: G2/1.0 Injection-Date: Thu, 10 Oct 2013 02:28:07 +0000 Original-Xref: usenet.stanford.edu gnu.emacs.help:201635 X-BeenThere: help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: Users list for the GNU Emacs text editor List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: help-gnu-emacs-bounces+geh-help-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: help-gnu-emacs-bounces+geh-help-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.help:93904 Archived-At: On Thursday, October 10, 2013 1:01:39 AM UTC+5:30, Emanuel Berg wrote: > Rustom Mody writes: > > > At least a partial explanation about why emacs is > > slipping so far behind vi?? > > How so? Can that be quantified somehow? What do you > mean? Quantified?? No idea A hunchy feeling? The only things I see used (in the physical world, leaving aside net forums like this one) are - vi - sublime text - eclipse roughly in that order. I know enough (about) statistics to know that converting my hunch into a hard statement would require considerably more data than I can muster. I know enough good business folk to also know that sharp guys use a right combo of hunches and numbers.