I love nano (especially the latest version, not that 2.9 stuff that's default on most linux distros). I don't mind vim and I'm happy to work in it if I have to,

I love nano (especially the latest version, not that 2.9 stuff that's default on most linux distros). I don't mind vim and I'm happy to work in it if I have to, but every now and then I redo the 'vim tutorial' to help me not forget, and for the most part, with a handful of (non-deal-breaker) exceptions, my thought is always "I can already do all this stuff in nano". Whenever I speak to people casually about why they like vim over "e.g. nano", I find that people who think vim is far superior often fall into one of these categories: - They like vim because it allows them to do things I think are bad software engineering practices which I would avoid anyway - They like vim because it allows them to do things they are not aware nano can also do as easily (especially given you e.g. can run arbitrary shell commands on a selection). - They've gone overboard and have added every single vim plugin in the book to convert it basically to an IDE or something that is no longer an editor. - Nerd cred. I only miss a couple of things when in nano, none of which are dealbreakers: - "highlight all search results" (but search and replacement otherwise works extremely well, and I can always do the highlighted search in parallel in a less window) - "shift all text to the right rather than only that line" (but again, one can simulate this in a less window trivially - it's just a bother to have to do so) - Inability to create pre-recorded custom macros; you can only have one recorded macro live at any time. But that's about it. But having said that, I would not call myself a seasoned vim user. So I ask with full honesty. Persuade me to jump to vim. Can anyone argue specific points of things vim does better that nano can't do?