From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Xah Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.help Subject: Re: How to get rid of *GNU Emacs* buffer on start-up? Date: Sat, 27 Sep 2008 07:17:49 -0700 (PDT) Organization: http://groups.google.com Message-ID: References: <87ljxoffs6.fsf@atthis.clsnet.nl> <71208e97-140c-445d-8eda-1705f11b14b3@r15g2000prd.googlegroups.com> <095ef0c0-c7f4-494d-8bf6-8a5ee43fd934@i20g2000prf.googlegroups.com> <3c61c357-0705-4ff4-b793-fa6827415fdd@n38g2000prl.googlegroups.com> <1222502501.880693@arno.fh-trier.de> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1222526460 11185 80.91.229.12 (27 Sep 2008 14:41:00 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 27 Sep 2008 14:41:00 +0000 (UTC) To: help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Original-X-From: help-gnu-emacs-bounces+geh-help-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sat Sep 27 16:41:58 2008 connect(): Connection refused Return-path: Envelope-to: geh-help-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1Kjazd-0003kB-6X for geh-help-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Sat, 27 Sep 2008 16:41:57 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:48738 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1KjayZ-00025t-Og for geh-help-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Sat, 27 Sep 2008 10:40:51 -0400 Original-Path: news.stanford.edu!newsfeed.stanford.edu!postnews.google.com!r15g2000prd.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail Original-Newsgroups: gnu.emacs.help Original-Lines: 35 Original-NNTP-Posting-Host: 24.6.185.159 Original-X-Trace: posting.google.com 1222525070 18693 127.0.0.1 (27 Sep 2008 14:17:50 GMT) Original-X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com Original-NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 27 Sep 2008 14:17:50 +0000 (UTC) Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com Injection-Info: r15g2000prd.googlegroups.com; posting-host=24.6.185.159; posting-account=bRPKjQoAAACxZsR8_VPXCX27T2YcsyMA User-Agent: G2/1.0 X-HTTP-UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; PPC Mac OS X 10_4_11; en) AppleWebKit/525.18 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/3.1.2 Safari/525.22, gzip(gfe), gzip(gfe) Original-Xref: news.stanford.edu gnu.emacs.help:162795 X-BeenThere: help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Users list for the GNU Emacs text editor List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: help-gnu-emacs-bounces+geh-help-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: help-gnu-emacs-bounces+geh-help-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.help:58136 Archived-At: Andreas Politz wrote: > > Personally, I am used to the way emacs works. The great thing about > > emacs is that anyone can customize the keyboard (and almost everything > > else) to be the way I like. After years of use, it is unlikely that my > > own key assignments will change. > > That's a nice freudian slip and summarization. Yeah. Many emacsers like to say how they like the way emacs is, yet they have a lot customization that changes emacs default ways. All the resistance about the *scratch* we see here, is not really about some technical issue or UI rational, it's more about a psychological identity of emacs. =E2=80=9C*scratch*=E2=80=9D is one of the = outstanding idiosyncracy of emacs. Saying to get rid of it is like admitting a disease. Similar things happens with Mac's one-button mouse. For like over a decade, mac fanatics defend how one button is superior. In the early 1990s when computer are not that popular, one button mouse with its associated UI does have a ease of use over 2 buttons. But beginning about late 1990s, it clearly inferior than 2 buttons as home computers becomes household item and Windows has been accustomized users for a number of years. During these time, you still see how Apple fanatics drivel and insist the 1-button is absolutely superior. Since about maybe 2002, even Apple itself ditched single button mouse, with some psychological twist the 2-button mouse they produced appear as one button mouse, and the new design is beautiful, but ergonomically the most painful and unusable. Lol. Xah =E2=88=91 http://xahlee.org/ =E2=98=84