Logging into "work" systems and typing "emacs" == "command not found". Typing "vi" opens a useful editor.
It's not that I hate emacs or have some aversion to anything except vi/vim. The problem is that vi is everywhere, and by mastering the always-available editor, I always have my tools at hand. On foreign systems, or highly regulated systems that I can't add software to, this is a huge advantage.
True, but the workflow you describe is not the natural one for Emacs.
Emacs has a built-in package called TRAMP [1] for remote work. You don't log into a distant server and open Emacs there, you use Emacs on your local PC and open the remote file naturally, using a syntax like /method:user@host:/path/to/file, but most often /-:host:/path/to/file (when using SSH access set as default, with your local user name). Except for the special file path it's just like for a local file.
Then when launching a shell command, or a full shell, or a grep or compile or whatnot from a buffer editing a remote file, Emacs will automatically launch the command remote machine too. That makes the experience rather transparent. It's possible to have multiple buffers editing files on different machines at the same time.
Yes vi is there on systems where you don't have Emacs. Vi is simple enough to remember the commands you need if this ever happens, and this is not really a reason to eschew something more powerful everywhere else.
As the sibling comment says you should try editing remote files with the editor running on your computer. Tramp provides this transparently for Emacs. You don't have to manually log in to edit remote files.
It's not that I hate emacs or have some aversion to anything except vi/vim. The problem is that vi is everywhere, and by mastering the always-available editor, I always have my tools at hand. On foreign systems, or highly regulated systems that I can't add software to, this is a huge advantage.