Discussing Qedit versus vi is a bit like standing on the beach and
trying to hold back the tide (here in Vancouver we average about a
10-foot tidal change daily).  You're not going to hold back the tide.
 
As Joe Campbell pointed out, learning vi is necessary for anyone who
works on multiple UNIX systems.  You can trust that vi is available on
every platform.  That doesn't always mean that you want to use vi as
your primary development editor.
 
Clifford Williams ([log in to unmask]) made some comments that
I would like to correct:
 
> I am a 'vi' bigot.  With any block mode editor, such as QEDIT, you
> make your changes and then you have to tell the editor to remember
> them.  With 'vi' when you make your changes the editor knows you made
> changes.  With QEDIT when you finish editing the file is already
> changed.  With 'vi' you save the file when you finish editing.
 
You can configure Qedit so that you rarely have to tell it to
update the page (use /set visual update on).  One of the things
that I like most about Qedit is that when you finish editing the file
is already changed.  Many users disagree with this style of editing,
but Qedit let's you have your cake and eat it too.  You can either use
/open-shut (make changes directly) or /text-keep (make changes to a
copy and save them later).
 
> The only time I use QEDIT is when I get to work with COBOL.
> 'vi' doesn't know COBOL and QEDIT does.
 
Which is one reason why users still are purchasing Qedit/UX, even
though they could use the "free" vi.
 
> 'vi' gets the job done alot faster, IMNSHO :)
 
What "job" gets done "faster"?  At Robelle, we have always believed
that we should solve problems for people and not try to create new
ones.  If Clifford feels that vi gets the jobs he has to accomplish
done faster, he should continue using vi.  For many of us, Qedit lets
us accomplish the jobs that we have to do a lot, lot, lot faster.
 
Cheers,
 
David     <[log in to unmask]>