4 ms·

> I feel like nano shipping as the default editor is a step-back. We have a less powerful tool because we want to attract newbies Perhaps, but your experience

> I feel like nano shipping as the default editor is a step-back. We have a less powerful tool because we want to attract newbies Perhaps, but your experience sounds like a good blueprint for what new terminal users might want. Start with nano move to more powerful tools when you need them.

radicalbyte 4y ago
Windows ships with Notepad, which is fine for 99.9% of users. Those who need more know how to install Notepad++, UltraEdit or Sublime.
dijit 4y ago
my concern would be that I dont think people would reach for the more powerful tools; since they arent being pressured into learning them and its impossible to articulate the power you would get until you have it. I was extremely resistant to learn new things when I thought my current way of working was perfectly fine. It’s only retrospectively that I realise how limited I was.
- kergonath 4y ago
  > I was extremely resistant to learn new things when I thought my current way of working was perfectly fine. It’s not the OS’ job to lecture users about their tools of choice. The Web is full of “vim is the dog’s bollocks” articles, if anyone has a modicum of interest to look at more complex tools. Now, we have to just set EDITOR in the dotfiles for each new student we get starting their MSc project. They have 6 months to do quantum chemistry stuff, not winning flame wars about whose editor is best. And they have already a lot of inane idiosyncrasies to learn in R and the usual Python libraries.
- kapep 4y ago
  It's also hard to articulate power if the people have no need for that power. People stay with nano because it's intuitive and good enough at editing some config files. What else would someone learning Linux even do with a text editor? I've tried to get into vi and emacs but I honestly never found a good use case for them, even as a developer. When I edit files, the changes are usually very small and I spent most time thinking about what to change. The time it takes to execute that change is negligible. If I need to process large files, those are usually in some kind format that can be manipulated with other tools much more easily. And when it comes to programming, modern IDEs are far superior. I don't doubt that you can be very productive with these editors but the "it's more powerful" argument always seems to mean "look how I fast I can manipulate large unstructured text files with some keyboard shortcuts magic", which is irrelevant to me.
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
benj111 4y ago
If someone asked you what drill they should buy having never used a drill before, not knowing what theyre going to use it for, but probably 'hanging pictures and stuff'. Would you suggest a top of the line SDS Max drill, or would you suggest some bog standard inexpensive drill that does the basics? less powerful doesn't mean worse if you aren't using the features. It just makes it harder to use.

radicalbyte 4y ago

Windows ships with Notepad, which is fine for 99.9% of users. Those who need more know how to install Notepad++, UltraEdit or Sublime.

dijit 4y ago

my concern would be that I dont think people would reach for the more powerful tools; since they arent being pressured into learning them and its impossible to articulate the power you would get until you have it. I was extremely resistant to learn new things when I thought my current way of working was perfectly fine. It’s only retrospectively that I realise how limited I was.

kergonath 4y ago
> I was extremely resistant to learn new things when I thought my current way of working was perfectly fine. It’s not the OS’ job to lecture users about their tools of choice. The Web is full of “vim is the dog’s bollocks” articles, if anyone has a modicum of interest to look at more complex tools. Now, we have to just set EDITOR in the dotfiles for each new student we get starting their MSc project. They have 6 months to do quantum chemistry stuff, not winning flame wars about whose editor is best. And they have already a lot of inane idiosyncrasies to learn in R and the usual Python libraries.
kapep 4y ago
It's also hard to articulate power if the people have no need for that power. People stay with nano because it's intuitive and good enough at editing some config files. What else would someone learning Linux even do with a text editor? I've tried to get into vi and emacs but I honestly never found a good use case for them, even as a developer. When I edit files, the changes are usually very small and I spent most time thinking about what to change. The time it takes to execute that change is negligible. If I need to process large files, those are usually in some kind format that can be manipulated with other tools much more easily. And when it comes to programming, modern IDEs are far superior. I don't doubt that you can be very productive with these editors but the "it's more powerful" argument always seems to mean "look how I fast I can manipulate large unstructured text files with some keyboard shortcuts magic", which is irrelevant to me.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]

benj111 4y ago

If someone asked you what drill they should buy having never used a drill before, not knowing what theyre going to use it for, but probably 'hanging pictures and stuff'. Would you suggest a top of the line SDS Max drill, or would you suggest some bog standard inexpensive drill that does the basics? less powerful doesn't mean worse if you aren't using the features. It just makes it harder to use.