No, EMACS is part of the ITS philosophy, it was written as a packabe of TECO macros on the Incompatible Timesharing Syatem. (according to the GNU Emacs Manual sitting on my desk....)
> Like i said, i think he should give up on the > name because "Linux" has too much momentum as > the name for the system, not just the kernel, > for him to succeed.
What we have here is a bunch of people who are campaining against a man who, for the last decade or so, has devoted his life to fighting for "lost" causes. Now that his earliest visions see some fruit, people decry his latest Jihad simply because "he can't win"!!! If he gave things up whenever they looked impossible, I wouldn't have Emacs, or gcc, or a GPL.
Thank you RMS, please don't ever quit. (Espescially when you're not going to win.)
Slashdot Mirror
No, EMACS is part of the ITS philosophy, it was written as a packabe of TECO macros on the Incompatible Timesharing Syatem. (according to the GNU Emacs Manual sitting on my desk....)
~30 TB eh' If I can write to the brain, force recall, and read back. I don't need a holographic drive. I'll take an organic one.
Picture a computer surrounded with little glass jars. Zoom in on the jars. See human brains in the jars, with wires leading to the computer....
> Like i said, i think he should give up on the
> name because "Linux" has too much momentum as
> the name for the system, not just the kernel,
> for him to succeed.
What we have here is a bunch of people who are campaining against a man who, for the last decade or so, has devoted his life to fighting for "lost" causes. Now that his earliest visions see some fruit, people decry his latest Jihad simply because "he can't win"!!! If he gave things up whenever they looked impossible, I wouldn't have Emacs, or gcc, or a GPL.
Thank you RMS, please don't ever quit. (Espescially when you're not going to win.)