Re: Re[2]: Emacs - was Re: Mail/news software

2000-05-07 Thread Andrej Marjan
> "Steve" == Steve Lamb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: Steve> Then why keep bringing it up? I just find it amusing Steve> that the selling point of a unix-like system is that it is Steve> modular and flexible so the first thing most people point Steve> to is a Microsoft-esque

Re: Re[2]: Emacs - was Re: Mail/news software

2000-05-04 Thread Daniel Reuter
Hello all there, On Wed, 3 May 2000, Steve Lamb wrote: > For me it isn't a GUI/CLI mindset it is simply the ability to do what > needs to be done. Windows doesn't let me do that in most cases. The standard > 'nix utilities provide a lot of automation for mundane tasks. I've been following

Re[2]: Emacs - was Re: Mail/news software

2000-05-03 Thread Steve Lamb
Tuesday, May 02, 2000, 9:10:53 PM, Pat wrote: > important and I don't see Windows 9x or NT giving this, although I have zero > experience with NT. But I do know that to kill a runaway process in Win95 > you have to Ctrl-Alt-Delete, wait for the little window to pop up (forgot > what it's called), a

Re[2]: Emacs - was Re: Mail/news software

2000-05-02 Thread Steve Lamb
Monday, May 01, 2000, 10:55:47 PM, Richard wrote: > I've had several debates featuring this very subject. > Some very long and drawn out and heated. Then why keep bringing it up? I just find it amusing that the selling point of a unix-like system is that it is modular and flexible so the firs

Re: Re[2]: Emacs - was Re: Mail/news software

2000-05-02 Thread Graeme Mathieson
Hi, "Richard Taylor" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Graeme Mathieson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote regarding Re: Re[2]: > Emacs > > > Has anybody ever tried to graft emacs directly on top of oskit? > > _Then_ you would have your operating system. :) > > It would be a great OS period. Perfect fo

Re: Re[2]: Emacs - was Re: Mail/news software

2000-05-02 Thread Richard Taylor
Graeme Mathieson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote regarding Re: Re[2]: Emacs > Steve Lamb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > [ snipped ... ] > > Simply stated, anything which requires Emacs to run > > is instantly lower than something that requires Windows to run because at > > least it /IS/ an OS and not a

Re: Re[2]: Emacs - was Re: Mail/news software

2000-05-01 Thread Graeme Mathieson
Hi, Steve Lamb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: [ snipped ... ] > Simply stated, anything which requires Emacs to run > is instantly lower than something that requires Windows to run because at > least it /IS/ an OS and not an editor that is a wannabe script interpreter > and OS rolled into one. Has

Re[2]: Emacs - was Re: Mail/news software

2000-05-01 Thread Steve Lamb
Monday, May 01, 2000, 11:59:24 AM, Richard wrote: > Emacs is far more useful than that... It's still the best > mailer/newsreader/text based office program in existence. That is highly debated, esp. for people who prefer not to have huge bloated pigs in memory, don't want to learn a speech i