Re: SEUL: Text editors.

[Donovan Rebbechi <elflord@pegasus.rutgers.edu>]

> That is my point exactly.  SEUL is for people who already know how to 
> use Windows.  

UNIX is used by very computer illiterate people. For example, every
college kid uses it to read their mail. Well the ones without computers
do. So it's not just the windows users who would benifit from a simple
version of linux. 

Think campuses, preloads, offices, etc.  


> This is how Linux gains users ... And it won't change in 

Linux will gain several moe users through large scale installations. 

> The main point of the story ( that you missed ) is that the user never 
> thought about the editor.  It did exactly what he expected and editor
> to do.

ditto with pico.

You raised this edit.com thing on C.O.L.A. a while ago and there as well
as here, no-one enthusiastically backed the view that edit.com was worth
cloning. Several ease-of-use advocates and even newbies both read and post
to that group. 

I don't believe anyone wants edit.com under linux except you.

The "ease-of-use" people invariably point to pico as an
easy to use editor. And it is. And with a slight modification (a line
saying that ^H = control-H ) it is entirely obvious how to use it. More
obvious than edit.com. 

I challenge you to explain to the subscribers to this list why pico (with
the modification I suggested) is not an easy to use editor. 

( A note on pine/pico license: it can be modified and redistributed. The
catch is that pine is pine. You can't use it to make a product that isn't
called 'pine'. Can modify but not produce 'derivative works' )

It seems to be an awful waste of effort trying to clone a DOS tool that
doesn't suit our purpose as well as the UNIX tools that we already have.

Pick some objective ease-of-use criteria ("Matches windows")  doesn't
count. And We'll pit a hacked pico / ee against edit.com and see which one
wins hands down.

-- Donovan