Subject: Re: CD-based distribution (was Another website....)
From: [email-masked] (John A. Turner)

16 Aug 1998 20:17:27 -0700
Message-ID: <[email-masked]>
References: <[email-masked]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
To: gnu-win32 mailing list <[email-masked]>

[email-masked] wrote:

> Why bother with XEmacs then, when NTEmacs is available and just as good?

Well, although this is somewhat off-topic for this list and has the
potential for becoming a heated religious war, the short answer is
that although NTEmacs is nice and has, along with the Cygwin32 stuff,
made Windows bearable for me, it simply isn't as good as XEmacs.

I'll just mention a couple of the differences that are reasons I
prefer XEmacs (snipped from the XEmacs FAQ, which can be found at
http://www.xemacs.org/faq/xemacs-faq.html):

      Many more bundled packages than GNU Emacs (e.g. VM).
      Binaries are available for many common operating systems. 
      Face support on TTY's. 
      A built-in toolbar. 
      Better Motif compliance. 
      Variable-width fonts. 
      Variable-height lines. 
      ToolTalk support. 
      Horizontal and vertical scrollbars (using real toolkit scrollbars). 
      The ability to embed arbitrary graphics in a buffer. 

--
John A. Turner
Blue Sky | VIFX    - http://www.bluesky-vifx.com/
Los Alamos Nat Lab - http://lune.mst.lanl.gov/turner/
Personal           - http://john.turner.org/
-
For help on using this list (especially unsubscribing), send a message to
"[email-masked]" with one line of text: "help".