I see where you're coming from here. But my conclusion was that Emacs with Evil is just as good an editor as Vim. And as a bonus I get the complete customizability of Emacs.
So when you say "I will pick Vim since it's the better editor," what Vim features in particular (beyond modeful editing, which Evil provides) make you say that?
This is exactly my point. The Emacs mentality is that Emacs can do everything...it can even be Vim. Why should I do that when I can just use Vim? Maybe Emacs can do anything, but it doesn't do anything well unless you've got a dynamite mode. Evil is not going to be as good of a Vim as Vim. I can tell that even with a glance at the Evil website. One of the best things about Vim is the extensive documentation. Evil just has a 22 page PDF manual...lots of which is filled with Emacs Lisp. So if I use Evil, I then need to spend time learning Evil and how to customize it with Emacs Lisp. Or I can just use Vim.
So when you say "I will pick Vim since it's the better editor," what Vim features in particular (beyond modeful editing, which Evil provides) make you say that?