[rescue] Re:EMACS

[Joshua D. Boyd]

On Wed, 27 Jun 2001, G W Adkins wrote:

> Agreed, it's got all those bloated, Word-Perfecty options which appeal to
> the "I don't care, I just want it to do what I want it to do" crowd.  The
> same crowd who likes Orifice 2000...

Actually, that might be the right idea sorta, but there is a big
difference.  For myself, Office 2000 (and Visual Studio) don't do what I
want to do. Office, for instance, does not have an easy way to create
tables of complex mathematical formulas.

I think that if most people actually focussed on what they wanted to do
then they wouldn't like office as well, although they might like emacs
just fine.  Office trys to distract you with unneed features while not
allowing to just get work done.

I suppose a more acurate way of putting it is that Emacs is for people who
know what they want to do and want their editor to help them get it done
faster, but vi is for people who want to do things the pure way.
Although, if you are a lisp hacker (something I aspire to, along with
smalltalk), than emacs is a rather pure way of doing things (especially if
you use an emacs like program that is emacs elips code reimplemented in a
real lisp environment, like edwin).

--
Joshua Boyd