[geeks] um, hi. I'm new.

[Michael A. Turner]

> > 	The one true editor. PICO PICO PICO Uber alis!
> 
> For me, if all I have to do is remove a # from a config file 
> or add a line
> to a script, I'm all about Pico/Nano.
> 
> However, I would *never* tell someone that their chioce of editor is
> inferior; if it gets the job done, I don't care if they use MS Word to
> write their shell scripts...
> 

	What I always find amusing in these arguments is that people miss
the fact that editor preference is based on what you started with. Same
thing with OSes and web browsers. Whatever you start out with is what you
will gravitate to. It is very hard to break these patterns once established.

	For example, I started out using Pico when I got taught how to use
my shell account at my first computer industry job. I didn't even know that
emacs and vi existed for a very long time. In school I got exposed to emacs
very heavily by a teacher that thought emacs was the end all and be all of
editors. He could do some crazy stuff with a config file. I learned vi
commands so that I could better use grep and other commands that accept vi
arguments. Despite all that though if I am on a unix machine and need to
edit a file what do I go for? Pico, it's like an old friend that understands
me. I don't have to think about he commands I just do what I need to do and
go from their.
	So making fun of people for the editor preferences is just silly,
it's like making fun of someone for the religion they learned as a kid. Some
people take their early indoctrinations to seriously after all.


Michael A. Turner
Systems Engineer
WHRO
michael.turner at whro.org
http://www.whro.org