That is for OSX, which I refuse to use on an principle of ethical software conduct. Apple is hostile to open software and computers as open platforms. They want to take away the open nature of computers which allowed them to exist in the first place and they use BS patent-lawsuits to hinder competitors willing to provide just that.
They are evil and I refuse to support them with a penny or any significant effort or attention.
Apart from that, talking about SFTP mounts is completely missing the point.
Sometime I'm in a terminal, on a router, NAS, cloud-server or whatever, and need to edit some files in the current folder.
What I do then is "$ emacs file", not change context, go to another local terminal and fuse-mount some completely remote FS with whatever keys and credentials I need to provide, in /mnt/remote/, and then fire up a local editor for /mnt/remote/the/actual/directory/i/was/working/in/file.
That's extremely inefficient.
When I say I need something to work in a terminal to be a proper solution, I mean any terminal.
Then stick with emacs. It sounds like its the perfect tool for your needs. Which is perfectly fine, right tool for the job and all that. That said, I would suggest that the ubiquity if vim (and latterly that of nano) renders your point a little pompous. No need for the same old pious rhetoric.
I fell for the peer pressure and tried to use a macbook some time ago and I feelt like I was in the movie "the island", but I wouldn't say that apple are any more evil than other companies in the IT industry.
So here I am running linux once more.
I have a lot of time invested in emacs but I have switched to sublime since early versions of v2-beta. My main reason was at that time the ruby and RoR modes for emacs wasn't really up to speed.
I like sublime text and I don't regret jumping on that train. Easy to get started, lots of features and plugins, highly configurable. I use sublime as my main "desktop" editor now.
When editing over ssh emacs is my preferred editor, after 15 years of using emacs as my primary editor I think I have enough emacs keystrokes deeply imprinted in my brain to last me a lifetime ... :)
That little rant seems like some significant effort and attention. That said, Sublime clearly isn't the editor for you, but it can be invoked from a command line, which I use every day.
Now, I know you mean running it within the terminal a la vim/emacs/nano etc, but you can set up sublime to run from terminal in linux (I set it up successfully on fedora, after ten minutes googling).
The downside of that is that it runs as an x windows in comparison to directly in terminal, which is a bit of an bummer when trying to work remotely. As much as I'd love for it to run in term, it'd pretty much just be a vim-alike, and why reinvent the wheel.
Sublime is more for software development. It sounds more to me like you're needing to edit config files and such. In that case, look no further than vi/emacs. They fit your needs. If you're looking to do development of anything more than a quick Perl/Python/Ruby/Bash script, then you might want to consider a development environment... which Sublime fits perfectly. For editing my apache.conf, I use Vim.
They are evil and I refuse to support them with a penny or any significant effort or attention.
Apart from that, talking about SFTP mounts is completely missing the point.
Sometime I'm in a terminal, on a router, NAS, cloud-server or whatever, and need to edit some files in the current folder.
What I do then is "$ emacs file", not change context, go to another local terminal and fuse-mount some completely remote FS with whatever keys and credentials I need to provide, in /mnt/remote/, and then fire up a local editor for /mnt/remote/the/actual/directory/i/was/working/in/file.
That's extremely inefficient.
When I say I need something to work in a terminal to be a proper solution, I mean any terminal.