> Unix abandoned (or never had) any conception of WYSIWYG, and probably never will. I hate it, too.

In this case, the complaint is that what you've got can't be represented by what you see. There are a couple of ways to approximately display what you see, but they're approximations. (One is wrap and the other is "off the edge of the screen".)

In a WYSIWYG, you can't represent a line longer than the screen width. This is a problem when lines matter.

That's why WYSIWYG is more accurately called "What You See Is All You Have".

That's a major difference in the "culture" (which was discussed on here yesterday), that probably shouldn't be changed (and you're right - it probably never will). Windows and Macs cater to WYSIWYG more because they focus on the end user. Unix is very much made for other developers, and when you add WYSIWYG into apps it complicates the situation. The UNIX philosophy explicitly states a preference for plain text.