4 ms·
At the time of writing, the supposed ubiquity of Vim, or rather Vi-clones, was often touted as a strong selling point by people with a severe case of Linux-myop
by johncoltrane 2y ago
At the time of writing, the supposed ubiquity of Vim, or rather Vi-clones, was often touted as a strong selling point by people with a severe case of Linux-myopia.
The "counterpoint" is not that Vim is not _available_ on Windows. It is that Vim is not on Windows _out of the box_. You must install the native binary to have it or, like you suggest, install _another system_ on your machine… that actually comes with Vim.
"Can have X" is not the same as "has X".
FWIW, experimenting with Linux is also what got me hooked to Vim (and the shell and all the rest) in the first place, but rose-tinted glasses are not for me.
- makeitdouble 2y agoI'm with you on vim not being there out of the box. I mean, even on Debian it's not in by default. But I also feel that ship has sailed for most software. We joke that windows/macos's default browser is only there to go install Chrome/firefox or any other browser of choice, and I see the wider reality of it as most OSes requirement a decent amount of installation to get to a usable point, even for very basic tasks. It's still easier to use software that is mostly available everywhere in mostly the same shape and form (also why so many people bet on VSCode I think)