Re: Emacs: Problems of the Scratch Buffer

[Chiron <chiron613.no.spam.@no.spam.please.gmail.com>]

On Thu, 19 Apr 2012 13:47:40 -0700, Bug Dout wrote:

> Several good points. But given the ultra-conservative nature of
> emacsians, changes will never be implemented. Gnu Emacs remains firmly
> in the last century.

See, saying things like that (GNU Emacs is in the last century) doesn't 
actually show that GNU Emacs is in any way deficient.  One problem with 
computers and software is that there is this mad scramble to have the 
latest whatever.  Most of the time, sure, it's better.  But "new" doesn't 
*automatically* mean better.  You could equally say that GNU Emacs has 
"stood the test of time."

But both claims are bullshit.  They say nothing at all about whether GNU 
Emacs should change, or how.  One claims "new is better," while the other 
claims "new is better."  The truth is, "better is better."

And really, "better" is a judgement made by each user.  Most of the 
arguments about Emacs make as much sense as arguing about what shoe size 
is "better."  It's the shoes that fit your own feet that are better.

So with Emacs.  Some people are never going to find it a good fit for 
their needs and habits.  They'll want to change it or use another tool.  
Others do find it a good fit.  They're not going to want to change it.

If Emacs works for you, use it.  If not, don't, or fix what you feel is 
wrong with it.  It's nothing but the most highly customizable editor on 
the planet.

-- 
I believe that professional wrestling is clean and everything else in
the world is fixed.
		-- Frank Deford, sports writer