From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: =?utf-8?Q?=C3=93scar_Fuentes?= Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Emacs learning curve Date: Fri, 16 Jul 2010 19:12:18 +0200 Message-ID: <87mxtr8i6l.fsf@telefonica.net> References: <4C3B6A8A.80105@gmx.de> <87wrt0e81n.fsf@telefonica.net> <62E9699C07054418AB66F9C5FCB54E5C@us.oracle.com> <87sk3oe3la.fsf@telefonica.net> <1154D96E7D2F401D849266F359E44BB9@us.oracle.com> <87ocecdzou.fsf@telefonica.net> <2256C17F740A425884AD551DE7758056@us.oracle.com> <87fwzodqqm.fsf@telefonica.net> <5138CDF30B2D4B778F948015614DA7BC@us.oracle.com> <87iq4ijtdy.fsf@lola.goethe.zz> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1279300360 17748 80.91.229.12 (16 Jul 2010 17:12:40 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 16 Jul 2010 17:12:40 +0000 (UTC) To: emacs-devel@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Fri Jul 16 19:12:38 2010 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1OZoSj-0007eg-VZ for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 16 Jul 2010 19:12:38 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:53841 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1OZoSj-0001Et-Ce for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 16 Jul 2010 13:12:37 -0400 Original-Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=57338 helo=eggs.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1OZoSd-0001Ej-G8 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 16 Jul 2010 13:12:32 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1OZoSc-0004zd-62 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 16 Jul 2010 13:12:31 -0400 Original-Received: from lo.gmane.org ([80.91.229.12]:49121) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1OZoSb-0004zI-Qr for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 16 Jul 2010 13:12:30 -0400 Original-Received: from list by lo.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1OZoSZ-0007ZX-6l for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 16 Jul 2010 19:12:27 +0200 Original-Received: from 83.42.13.171 ([83.42.13.171]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Fri, 16 Jul 2010 19:12:27 +0200 Original-Received: from ofv by 83.42.13.171 with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Fri, 16 Jul 2010 19:12:27 +0200 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ Original-Lines: 28 Original-X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: 83.42.13.171 User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.0.50 (gnu/linux) Cancel-Lock: sha1:9NQJ9tjiv1Ef4Y4ZD/cflwf1NnY= X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6 (newer, 3) X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:127444 Archived-At: "Alfred M. Szmidt" writes: > Can we please stop with the extravagant claim that new users are not > attracted to emacs because of some idiosyncratic bindings? That claim is extravagant indeed. The users are not attracted by the idiosyncratic keybindings, they are *repelled* by them. > It is true that there are features thatemacs lacks, or are suboptimal, > that some popular editors have, but the bindings don't scare anyone. > Repating that claim won't make it true. You talk as if we were making up something. My own personal experience as an Emacs novice (long time ago) as well as while trying to introduce others to Emacs, plus lots of testimonials on the Internet, had convinced me that the keybindings are the most serious entry barrier, except for the cases where the new user lacks a long experience with editors that follows CUA. > One should strive for what is sensible and logical, not what is > currently modern and popular. The reason people are attached to "the > old way" is because it makes sense, and it has proven itself over 30 > years. If there is something in Emacs that is not sensible nor logical, that's the keybindings. Not only they are different from the current established ones, they often seem planned with the clear intention of causing RSI :-)