>>>>> "GCVR" == GCVR <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
GCVR> Hi
GCVR> While there seems to be a bit of a lull on the heavy
GCVR> technicalities regarding Emacs/JDE: I have not used Xemacs
GCVR> yet, and I am very happy with Emacs and JDE on Win95/NT so
GCVR> far. Are there really good reasons why one should consider
GCVR> changing to Xemacs? (when they get the bug mentioned in recent
GCVR> communications fixed).
Its a little prettier, it can do proportional width and
height fonts, and can display arbritary images in its buffer. There
are a number of packages available on XEmacs alone (and vice
versa). However it tends to annoy GNU heads because the software
maintainers of XEmacs are a bit lax about maintaining copyright
information about the code, which means that there is always a risk of
some company claiming properitary ownership over parts of XEmacs. Its
not happened with XEmacs (to my knowledge) but I know it happened to
GNUEmacs in the past when they were a bit laxer.
Theres a description of the differences in the relevant
FAQ's. In a touching display of the the advantages of the free
software movement over commericial software the description of why
GNUEmacs is crap, and XEmacs is much better can be found in the
GNUEmacs FAQ, whilst a piece by Stallman generally slagging off the
XEmacs maintainers can be found in the XEmacs FAQ. www.emacs.org. and
www.xemacs.org are the relevant places....
Personally I think the best reason for using one or the
other is because you are used to it. I prefer GNUEmacs, and I cant be
bothered re-writing my bulging .emacs files for the pleasure of
switching over. Other people who have used XEmacs on unix are of
course waiting with baited breath for it to becomes stable on win32
for the same reason.
Phil
