(Any chance you could drop me an email reply rather than post a
response? I'm really enjoying this discussion, but I fear it may be
beginning to irritate some of those who come here to discuss W7 or photo
matters. My email is valid. I accept your choice not to release yours.)

In message , harry newton
writes:
He who is J. P. Gilliver (John) said on Thu, 12 Oct 2017 10:32:01
+0100:
[]
While nospam almost always (if not always) get the point wrong, I
assume
you understood full well the power of Gvim but also the inherent
complexity.

Yes, though see next post (-:

Nospam has a huge bias for Apple products, where he *thinks* (erroneously)
that I have a bias against them - but I actually don't. I just *understand*
them for what they are, and more importantly, I understand that Apple isn't
in the business of making the best products - they're in the business
of
making the most money off their customers - which they do very well.

Not _entirely_; they also want to keep tight control of things, so that
any one thing their users do doesn't break things for that user. I
personally don't like being subject to such control (Windows seems to be
going the same way), but I do see the advantages - for both Apple and a
(large?) proportion of their users. I _do_ also find their products
vastly overpriced, even allowing for the - probably not insignificant -
costs of maintaining the environment as I've just described.

As an avowed freeware and freedom junkie, Apple's business and
technical
models are the antithesis of mine. However, I use Apple products in the
schools that I teach at, and I give Apple phones as gifts, and I've

That's an interesting one - why do you? You can get an Android 'phone of
similar or better technical spec. for a lot less than any given iPhone;
I presume that you are giving them to people who you know need the
closed and safe environment already discussed.
[]
Back to gvim versus something else, gvim, to me, is like a wife whom I've
grown up with since childhood, who has enabled me to do things I wouldn't
have been able to do with any other text editor as quickly or as
efficiently.

Enabled _you_ to, yes. You maybe are forgetting your "muscle memory".

You don't seem to appreciate the efficiency of vi, but I do.
I do, actually - I just don't have much need for it these days.
It just means we place different values on different things.
Definitely! But we are all different, and that's probably good.

It's almost like the classic arguments in society today, whether they
be
gun control versus gun owners' rights or abortion control versus
woman's
rights to their bodies or gay rights versus marriage contracts, etc.

Now we're _really_ getting off-topic - those following stop here if
you're wanting to stay on computing matters (-: [Though there is a
_little_ about text editors at the end.]

Each side has a *completely* different argument, where there is zero
one-to-one lineup, where there is always a "childish" side of the argument
and a "more refined" side of the argument.

For example...

The childish side of the gun-control argument is that guns kill people so
if you got rid of guns, you'd have fewer dead people, whereas the more
refined side of the argument is that guns kill people and that's
exactly
why the founding fathers put the right into the second amendment as a
fourth power against oppressive government.

Yes, for militias, not individuals, I think. (I'm in the UK, where there
have been recent years where the number of people shot dead by the
police _nationally_ have been in single figures - I think some years
zero. I present that just for interest, not saying it's better than the
US situation!)

The childish side of the abortion-rights argument is that abortions are
killing babies whereas the more refined side of the argument is that
abortions are killing babies but it's actually better for society and the
mother to kill the baby.

Ooh, you're on hot coals there! (You're also not considering the
argument about when it becomes a sentient entity - I won't use the
emotive word "baby" - which argument also requires consideration.)

The childish side of the gay-rights argument is that homosexuals should be
allowed the same rights as heteronormal people while the more refined side
of the argument is that homosexuals should be allowed the same rights
as
heteronormal people but that marriage is something that is so complex and
engrained in our society that changing the definition of marriage isn't as
simple as a bunch of wackos in California would like to think it is
(and
yes, I live in California, in Silicon Valley, so I know plenty of wackos).

You've summed that one up well. (Though the antis are not _all_ wackos.)

Suffice to say that the childish side *never* understands the more refined
side of the argument - while the refined side *always* understands the
childish side of the argument.

Yes. Which makes things more difficult for we who see both sides, as we
find it more difficult to argue: those who only see one side are much
quicker to respond, which is often to their advantage. (I hate and fear
mobs of all kinds.)

Such is how things work. In the case of the iOS apologists, they
*never*
seem to understand the reality of the argument (nospam being a classic iOS
apologist) while the more refined argument takes into account the inherent
capabilities and costs of the issue in question.

I'd be wary of using the term "apologist" quite so freely: in my
experience, the person using the term in any argument is the one who
usually goes down in my estimation, _even if it is true_. Probably, the
same applies to _any_ name-calling.

It is my supposition that almost all, if not all, the Apple-versus-Windows
arguments, for example, are initiated, propagated, and perpetuated simply
by this propensity of the Apple owners to never see facts as they are,

You're casting aspersions at _all_ Apple owners (yes, I saw you use the
word "propensity", but still). _Some_ Apple owners - I suspect it's a
minority, but perhaps a bigger one than you think - are willing to pay
the extra, for the convenience of knowing it will all work together
properly: they value their _time_ (not) spent on the matter highly. To
give a very imperfect analogy, you (assuming you drive) buy fuel for
your car without worrying whether it's appropriate: I'm not talking
about whether it's contaminated, but it could be fuel that would work
fine in a differently-set-up engine than yours but wouldn't in yours,
but you don't worry about that, you just buy it. (Don't analyse that
analogy - I said it's imperfect; it just came to mind, as car analogies
are popular.)

while the more refined argument shows facts as they exist. Certainly this

Though I agree with you (I think) on the three examples above, you've
got to be careful not to be saying "the more refined argument is the one
that agrees with me" (-:

thread today where the edited video was needed *proves* the closed
mindedness of the iOS apologists in spades.

"closed-mindedness", "apologists" - see above.

https://groups.google.com/d/msg/comp.mobile.ipad/-T7FEXIdU9Q/Dhy-LFH3AwAJ

As for gvim versus some other editor, I forget which is the editor you
propose. Was it Notepad++? Or was it something else?

No, it wasn't/isn't. As it happens, I don't _have_ a preferred one; I
have Notepad+ (one +; version 1.11; by RogSoft; I _think_ no longer
being developed and not easy to find) installed on this machine as a
replacement for the basic Notepad, probably because I once wanted
something it did better than the basic one and have left it in place. I
also have 1-Word; I also, I suppose, have the editor built into
Turnpike, which is my internet suite, and which I'm using now to type
this, in the same way as a Thunderbird user would be using the one built
into Thunderbird to type his/her emails and posts, without really
thinking that that's what s/he is doing. I have "muscle memory" for all
of them, though can't at the moment think of _much_ that requires it in
any of them. I also use Word for word processing (the 2003 version),
where I might want the versatility of fonts, justification,
underline/bold/italic, and so on, though I wouldn't buy it (I bought a
1998 - yes, 1998 version, it was a "Burgundy release" version of the
1997 one - cheaply at a computer fair; my 2003 one was legally obtained
though not paid for).

If it was Notepad++, the lack of cross-platform capabilities is a
killer
out of the box, where the childish side only sees the Windows performance
which the more refined side will grant, but the more refined side of
the
argument sees so much more than just the Windows capabilities of a text
editor.

For those who do not _use_ other platforms, such is not of relevance
(and we _slightly_ do not like the implication that we're not "refined")

--
I realize this argument is philosophical so please understand that concept.

See request at top (-:
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

31.69 nHz = once a year. (Julian Thomas)