| |
| ▲ | mschuster91 19 hours ago | parent [-] | | > These days JOE (Joe's Own Editor) still uses a similar keyset. joe is definitely among the easiest CLI/TUI editors there are. | | |
| ▲ | EvanAnderson 14 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | I remember finding joe back in the 90s, having come to Linux from mainly DOS, and bring overjoyed. The little Unix I'd used up to that point (mainly Xenix and a little SCO) had me using ed, which was enough like old DOS EDLIN that I could manage. When I found myself in vi I'd just hang up the modem because I never could figure out how to get out of it. >smile< | |
| ▲ | icedchai 18 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | Back in the 90's, "pico" was always the go-to editor for those who didn't want to mess around with emacs or vi. | | |
| ▲ | technothrasher 17 hours ago | parent [-] | | Jove was the big editor on campus at the University of Rochester back in the very early 90's, mostly because Jonathan Payne, who wrote it, attended the school. When I got there I pushed for Joe adoption because it was a simpler editor for the less geeky undergraduate users to use. Pico never really was a phenomenon there at the time. |
|
|
|
| |
| ▲ | fragmede a day ago | parent | next [-] | | https://archive.org/details/wordstar_202310 | |
| ▲ | gapan a day ago | parent | prev [-] | | > WordStar was basically all we needed, and it still is.
>
> Imagine if you had something that small and powerful today. I completely agree with the first part. But why do you think we don't have that today, if we choose to do so? | | |
| ▲ | flenserboy 21 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | 1. there is no longer a market for certain sorts of software, whether due to market dominance (Word), or the likely market size being too small to bother with. 2. FOSS has dropped into Code Reuse Mode*, & getting out of that is going to require motivated individuals to build their own, entirely new versions. LibreOffice is Good Enough for most users, so why go to all the effort of starting from ground level when a fork & reskin will do? one would hope that FOSS would lead to having cool, alternate approaches to particular use problems (as in the old days, when there were myriad word processors on the market — XyWrite, WordPerfect, WriteNow, Word, etc., etc.), but Good Enough means that attention can be put on more interesting problems. what we're left with is a mediocre mass of applications. *which is why nearly every alternate OS ends up feeling like Linux with missing programs & weird commands, so why not just use Linux? we're going to be stuck in a rut for a long time to come. | | |
| ▲ | yjftsjthsd-h 20 hours ago | parent [-] | | > FOSS has dropped into Code Reuse Mode, & getting out of that is going to require motivated individuals to build their own, entirely new versions I don't necessarily disagree that there are some issues in the ecosystem, but I don't think that's the problem. For starters, I don't think anyone is* forking LibreOffice and throwing on a layer of paint? And when I need a word processor, I personally prefer AbiWord, which is its own thing. In particular, > which is why nearly every alternate OS ends up feeling like Linux with missing programs & weird commands, so why not just use Linux? we're going to be stuck in a rut for a long time to come. This feels backwards. Alternatives tend to present a similar interface without* sharing code. In fact, even just on Linux I'd argue we have a rather lot of (re)implementations of the same things: Consider that we are in a position where Debian is shipping GNU coreutils, Ubuntu replaced them with a rust version (uutils), and Alpine has been happily shipping busybox for years (AFAIK, as long as it's existed). |
| |
| ▲ | philipallstar 21 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | > But why do you think we don't have that today, if we choose to do so? Network effects. |
|
|
