What's the point of nano when vi does everything it can better and more effective

What's the point of nano when vi does everything it can better and more effective

What's the point of vi when neovim does everything it can better and more effectively?

Except for ex mode.

what's the point of all your gay shit when you have a graphical text editor?

>graphical text editor?
bloated

It's (more) noob-friendly. Any experienced user should be using vim or emacs.

/thread

>vim
Faggot editor, use vi

You have RAM to use.
Gnome uses 1 GB in idle, and it is OK.

vim is just as much "vi" as whatever you have installed as "vi", which is probably either busybox vi, nvi, or even minimal vim in vi-compatible mode. None of these are the original vi.

>i don't like usuability because >muh bloat
i'm sorry that you have 2mbs of ram, you faggot.

What's the point of ex mode when the other modes do everything it can better and more effectively?

Usability without ever having your hands leave the keyboard.

Because I don't want to use a CLI editor ever in the first place, and when I do it's typically to make a single line change in some config on my cloud webhost, usually for nginx or apache.

I hope you autistic CLI oldfags die off soon.

like every other text editor?

>Point of nano.
Retards need text editors, too.

>muh bloat

What's the point of vi when I can just echo every thing into a file?

>What's the point of nano
Windows Admins who have to putty into shitty Linux boxes to edit a config.

That was rude.

Ever tried to use vim bindings in any graphical editor? They never quite work right.