Language Selection

English French German Italian Portuguese Spanish

nano vs. vim: Terminal Text Editors Compared

Filed under

One of the primary ways to use the Terminal is to configure text files Terminal text editors and control how certain programs or system services behave. For terminal text editing, two of the top choices are nano and vim. In order to determine which one is better, we’ll look at features and general ease of use. While system resource usage could also technically be considered in this comparison, it’s safe to assume that as terminal text editors they require a negligible amount of system resources.


The nano project was created in 1999 in order to emulate the Pico text editor but improve on it. nano also claims to be 2/3 to 1/8 the size of the Pico binary, which makes it very lean and usable on even the weakest systems. vim, originally developed in 1991, is based on the original vi text editor that was developed in 1976. Therefore, like nano, vim aims to improve upon the project that it’s based on. As of right now, these two along with emacs are still the top contenders for Terminal text editing.

rest here

More in Tux Machines

Subresource Integrity Support Ready For Firefox 43, Chrome 45

With the upcoming releases of the Mozilla Firefox and Google Chrome web-browsers is support for the W3C Subresource Integrity (SRI) specification. The Subresource Integrity feature allows web developers to ensure that externally-loaded scripts/assets from third-party sources (e.g. a CDN) haven't been altered. The SRI specification adds a new "integrity" HTML attribute when loading such assets where you can specify a hash of the file source expected -- the loaded resource must then match the hash for it to be loaded. Read more

today's leftovers

Linux Switches/Routers

today's howtos