Here is a doctor session in emacs...
DR> I am the psychotherapist. Please, describe your problems. Each time you are finished talking, type RET twice. Me> doctor, I think I'm in the twilight zone DR> Why do you say that? Me> because this discussion list has gone haywire DR> Is it because this discussion list has gone haywire that you came to me? Me> yes DR> I see... Well, what makes you believe this is so? Me> It all started with my mother DR> Tell me something about your family. and so on... On 10/16/07, P. J. Alling <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Now I know I'm in the twilight zone... > > Gonz wrote: > > Exactly. I frequently run into situations where making very > > sophisticated edits to extremely large and complex files would have > > been impossible in any other editor (especially the practially useless > > vi). Emacs rules. I have a large library of Lisp emacs extensions > > for dozens of special needs. > > > > > > > > On 10/16/07, P. J. Alling <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > >> But it's extensible using LISP, how could that be bad? > >> > >> Adam Maas wrote: > >> > >>> Actually it's just ingrained muscle memory, years of having to use vi > >>> while maintaining services on Unix machines means that the basic editing > >>> commands are pretty much automatic. vi is ideal for that use, it's > >>> lightweight and everything has it. > >>> > >>> I still :wq on a regular basis in just about every other editor/word > >>> processor. > >>> > >>> If you want punishment, use emacs. All the weight of Word, none of the > >>> Eye Candy. > >>> > >>> -Adam > >>> > >>> > >>> P. J. Alling wrote: > >>> > >>> > >>>> You are a glutton for punishment... > >>>> > >>>> Adam Maas wrote: > >>>> > >>>> > >>>>> I use vi > >>>>> > >>>>> -Adam > >>>>> Always the odd one out. > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> Tom C wrote: > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>>> It'll likely be a matter of attrition. What % of people here use > >>>>>> WordPerfect as opposed to MS Word? > >>>>>> > >>>>>> I'll bet it's a 5/95 ratio if not higher. Not too different from where > >>>>>> Pentax stands in the market, despite some recent relative success with > >>>>>> the > >>>>>> K10D. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Your suppositions are probably correct. When I say done for, I'm not > >>>>>> predicting when... I'm saying that inevitable market forces will > >>>>>> finally > >>>>>> take their toll, unless something changes quickly. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Tom C. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>>> From: Adam Maas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >>>>>>> Reply-To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List <pdml@pdml.net> > >>>>>>> To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List <pdml@pdml.net> > >>>>>>> Subject: Re: Next move from Pentax: anyone in the know (even under > >>>>>>> NDA) ? > >>>>>>> Date: Tue, 16 Oct 2007 00:20:34 -0400 > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Why? Pentax has never been a player in the Pro 35mm market. Not being > >>>>>>> one now will make little difference. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> I expect to see them bring out a body above the K10D within the next 6 > >>>>>>> months, or a K10D 'successor' that is little more than the new Sony > >>>>>>> 12MP > >>>>>>> sensor and a new shutter in the K10D body, perhaps with a higher > >>>>>>> framerate. I don't expect to see a Pentax body above the $1300 or so > >>>>>>> price point. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> -Adam > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Tom C wrote: > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> LOL. You're not breaking it to me. I was being kind. :-) > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> Pentax has a slim chance yet to recover. If they blow it in the > >>>>>>>> next 6 > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>> - 12 > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> months though, I susect they are done for. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> Tom C. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> From: "Mark Erickson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >>>>>>>>> Reply-To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List <pdml@pdml.net> > >>>>>>>>> To: "pdml" <pdml@pdml.net> > >>>>>>>>> Subject: Next move from Pentax: anyone in the know (even under NDA) > >>>>>>>>> ? > >>>>>>>>> Date: Mon, 15 Oct 2007 20:59:17 -0400 > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> I hate to break it to you, but in the USA, Pentax *is* a "2nd tier > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>> camera > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> company". The company hasn't released a truly professional system > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>> camera > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> here (or anywhere, actually) since the LX. The current high-end > >>>>>>>>> Pentax > >>>>>>>>> lens > >>>>>>>>> selection is miniscule compared to Canon and Nikon. Pentax does not > >>>>>>>>> provide > >>>>>>>>> the kind of professional support that Canon and Nikon do at major > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>> sporting > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> events. Pentax products lack presence on store shelves in the USA. > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Etc. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> Tom C wrote: > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> ----- Original Message ----- > >>>>>>>>>>> From: "John Sessoms" > >>>>>>>>>>> Subject: Re: Next move from Pentax: anyone in the know (even under > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>> NDA) > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> ? > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>> If memory serves the other two are an over-priced Nissan and an > >>>>>>>>>>>> over-priced Honda. > >>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> I guess that depends on what your personal comfort is worth. > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> William Robb > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> My analogy was not about price, it was about image, prestige, > >>>>>>>>>> perception in the market place. Sure a FF DSLR will cost more > >>>>>>>>>> than one with an APS-C size sensor. If the Canons, Nikon's, > >>>>>>>>>> Sony's of the world offer FF DSLR's, then Pentax must also. > >>>>>>>>>> If they do not, they will relegate themselves to a 2nd > >>>>>>>>>> tier camera company, and it doesn't matter who loves their > >>>>>>>>>> camera, or how much it satisfies their current needs. > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> Tom C. > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> -- > >>>>>>>>> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > >>>>>>>>> PDML@pdml.net > >>>>>>>>> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > >>>>>>>>> to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above > >>>>>>>>> and > >>>>>>>>> follow the directions. > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>> -- > >>>>>>> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > >>>>>>> PDML@pdml.net > >>>>>>> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > >>>>>>> to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and > >>>>>>> follow the directions. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>> > >>> > >>> > >> -- > >> Remember, it's pillage then burn. > >> > >> > >> -- > >> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > >> PDML@pdml.net > >> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > >> to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and > >> follow the directions. > >> > >> > > > > > > > -- > Remember, it's pillage then burn. > > > -- > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > PDML@pdml.net > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow > the directions. > -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
