Re: [OT, sorry] Re: keyboard tweaking without X
On 2007-05-17, Amy Templeton <amy.g.templeton@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Thanks I'll look into that. Now that you've inadvertently put me onto
>> w3m.el (if a lit student can do it...)
>
> Hehehe...revealing my area of study does actually tend to make
> people more receptive to computer-y suggestions, but *less*
> receptive to book suggestions! It's really weird. I just don't get
> the whole "Oh, you're studying lit., therefore your reading level
> must be *far above* mine and I could never enjoy a book *you* would
> read" thing.
In my case, it's not so much that we assume you lit-types read at a
higher level than mere mortals, but rather that to succeed in the
field you have to read only the most boring books, and then you have
to analyze them to death, in case ordinary folk might be thinking that
they still might enjoy reading them.
Come to think of it, that describes academic botany almost equally
well. Ye gods, it will be good to finish this thesis.
> Not saying stuff like that (in other domains; I
> obviously wouldn't start talking to myself about how intimidated I
> was by me) is *exactly* why I was able to learn *anything* about
> computers, because I skipped the whole "Oh, GNU/Linux is just for
> computer scientists. Oh, gee, I could never learn how to do this,
> because look who *does* know how to do it" thing. I mean, I'm glad
> that you liked the tip(s) ( :-) ); I guess I just wish there were
> some way of spreading the word that (for example) Linux *is* for
> computer scientists, but that doesn't mean it's not also for other
> people, or that [whatever I'm reading at a given moment] *is* a
> positive contribution to the literary tradition or whatever, but
> that doesn't mean that my hypothetical friend the biology major
> couldn't enjoy it. I suppose I'm just annoyingly positive about
> people's abilities :-) .
Once again, you lead one to suspect your true identity. 20 year-olds
are expected to think they already know everything. I know I did. And
from what I see of the young whipper-snappers around campus, that
hasn't changed so much in general.
>
>> I've finally found a text-based browser that provides all the
>> features I need, which drastically reduces my need for X.
>
> Well, good for you! Personally, I like X. It lets me see pretty
> pictures in emacs-w3m or iceweasel or whatever (though regular w3m
> can display images on the console).
>
Yeah, I suspect my ideal solution will still be some combination of
xterms, emacs, and fluxbox, but it's cool to see how far the
command-line can be pushed in terms of a usable work environment. What
I really need is to find a more efficient way to manage the dozen
emacs windows, 3 or 4 xterms and sundry xpdf and browser windows I end
up spewing across four desktops. The more I can shovel into emacs the
better, since that is the best way to avoid the mouse. It just gets
tricky managing all those buffers, even with the amazing iswitchb
working its magic.
Seeing how easy it was to toggle images on and off, and use the emacs
movement commands to navigate webpages, w3m is really impressive. Any
clues for importing my firefox bookmarks?
Cheers,
Tyler
Reply to: