+
+@subsection Which method is the right one for me?
+@cindex choosing the right method
+
+Given all of the above, you are probably thinking that this is all fine
+and good, but it's not helping you to choose a method! Right you are.
+As a developer, we don't want to boss our users around but give them
+maximum freedom instead. However, the reality is that some users would
+like to have some guidance, so here I'll try to give you this guidance
+without bossing you around. You tell me whether it works @dots{}
+
+My suggestion is to use an inline method. For large files, out-of-band
+methods might be more efficient, but I guess that most people will want
+to edit mostly small files.
+
+I guess that these days, most people can access a remote machine by
+using @code{ssh}. So I suggest that you use the @code{ssh} method.
+So, type @kbd{C-x C-f
+@value{prefix}ssh@value{postfixsinglehop}root@@otherhost@value{postfix}/etc/motd
+@key{RET}} to edit the @file{/etc/motd} file on the other host.
+
+If you can't use @code{ssh} to log in to the remote host, then select a
+method that uses a program that works. For instance, Windows users
+might like the @code{plink} method which uses the PuTTY implementation
+of @code{ssh}. Or you use Kerberos and thus like @code{krlogin}.
+
+For the special case of editing files on the local host as another
+user, see the @code{su} or @code{sudo} method.
+
+People who edit large files may want to consider @code{scp} instead of
+@code{ssh}, or @code{pscp} instead of @code{plink}. These out-of-band
+methods are faster than inline methods for large files. Note, however,
+that out-of-band methods suffer from some limitations. Please try
+first whether you really get a noticeable speed advantage from using an
+out-of-band method! Maybe even for large files, inline methods are
+fast enough.
+
+