[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: nano editor in Shrike?



On Tue, 1 Apr 2003, Matthew Miller wrote:

>In all seriousness: in what way is mutt _not_ a good replacement for pine?
>Sure, it's got configurationitis, but these days, aren't people who are
>looking for an e-mail client that Just Works (a la Havoc) going to go for an
>X11-based option? Or webmail, even.

mutt is not a good replacement for pine in the exact same way 
that vi is not a good replacement for emacs, emacs is not a good 
replacement for vi, ford is not a good replacement for chevy, 
chevy is not a good replacement for ford, carob is not a good 
replacement for chocolate, etc.

Some people may not be too attached, and may make such a 
transition easily enough.  Others may be deeply entrenched in 
pine's advanced features, and the specific manner in which the 
pine user interface operates, or to specific feature operation.  
I myself fall into this category.  Regardless of whatever 
percentage of feature for feature overlap that the two programs 
may or may not have, and regardless of the specific features that 
one of the two applications have over the other, people who are 
used to using one app, and it's feature set and UI are not going 
to take another app on par.

It's human nature to resist change, and to cling to what one is
familiar with.  That was true 100 years ago, and I suspect it'll
be true 100 years from now.  It's more about familiarity and 
preference than it is about one program being better than the 
other, or being subtitutable.

No application-religious-flamewars required.


-- 
Mike A. Harris     ftp://people.redhat.com/mharris
OS Systems Engineer - XFree86 maintainer - Red Hat



-- 
Phoebe-list mailing list
Phoebe-list@xxxxxxxxxx
https://listman.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/phoebe-list

[Home]     [Kernel List]     [Red Hat Install]     [Red Hat Watch List]     [DVD Store]     [Red Hat Development]     [Gimp]     [Yosemite News]

Powered by Linux