Re: [Conclusion] Looking for an emacs replacement
T o n g <mlist4suntong@yahoo.com> writes:
> there is only one looks and feel, the Unix one. Over the years, emacs is
> moving towards Windows, I lost its xterm-like scroll bar years ago, now
> the whole Unix-like look and feel is gone. It's OK to woo the windows
> users, but to completely ignore the Unix users, that's very sad.
What exactly are you missing? You can still run emacs fine on the
console or in a terminal as you could 15--20 years ago, and you can use
the GUI frames if you like, even all at the same time --- or compile a
version that doesn't have X-support at all.
> I don't want to spend a minute more on learning to configure its
> bizarred GTK interface any more.
Is it necessary to do that? I've compiled it '--with-toolkit lucid'
... That doesn't seem to make much of a difference, but I almost never
use these menus. I'm sure they can be turned off, only I never tried.
Did you really see any relevant functionality/feature disappear over the
last 15-20 years, or did you see the look and feel significantly change?
> On Sat, 08 Sep 2012 11:50:39 +0200, lee wrote:
>
>> You might as well use emacs more, there are so many little details one
>> doesn't think about anymore and then misses in others ...
>
> That's so true. Sad, but true.
There's probably not much point in trying to turn other editors into
emacs :) And if you added missing features to other editors in a way
conforming to how these editors do their things, the look and feel of
these editors would very likely be much more different from the look and
feel of emacs than emacs itself.
> Komodo Edit – the Best Notepad++ Alternative in Ubuntu
Looks much different from emacs ... How do you like it?
--
Debian testing amd64
Reply to: