Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

25 years ago I hoped we would extend Emacs to do WYSIWG word processing

lists.gnu.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 186 posts

Re: 25 years ago I hoped we would extend Emacs to do WYSIWG word processing

#71

Post by rout39574 »

gexla wrote: post #36

> I don't know how to use Org mode, and don't know what it does (it seems to do so many things), but if it displays through Emacs then there are many formatting features that it can't display in a WYSIWYG fashion like Libre Office. I can't believe Stallman doesn't know how to use Org mode. If he is interested in selling people on Emacs, then Org mode is one of the killer features for the presentation. I don't expect…

When RMS says he's not familiar with a feature, you can believe him.

Org-mode is fantastic, but a very, very recent addition to the Emacs cosmology.

Re: 25 years ago I hoped we would extend Emacs to do WYSIWG word processing

#72

Post by rout39574 »

dspillett wrote: post #48

I'm hoping this is a joke, otherwise > Could people please start working on the features that are needed? sounds far too like the completely detail-less requirements we get through from our clients like "please provide robust MI".

Visualize RMS as like the patron saint of a religion, which is full of schism and sub-sect.

He's using his position to influence mindshare, and he doesn't think he's got a handle on the details. He just wants some of his devotees to start kicking the problem around.

Re: 25 years ago I hoped we would extend Emacs to do WYSIWG word processing

#73

Post by icebraining »

lmm wrote: post #70
icebraining wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you just want a common runtime, what's wrong with java apps Oracle v. Google. By CLR I assume you mean the CLI, but only a fool would trust a "standard" controlled by MS and driven by a proprietary implementation, not to mention that the latest version doesn't even have a patent promise from them.

Oracle lost the lawsuit, except for the part where Google literally copied one of their classes.

And all they had to do was pay Keker & Van Nest for two years, without knowing whether they'd win or not - and Google didn't even make a VM that can run Java apps!

Not to mention that Oracle has appealed, so we still don't know if Google is clear or not.

If you want to risk getting yourself or your company involved in that quagmire, by all means do so.

Re: 25 years ago I hoped we would extend Emacs to do WYSIWG word processing

#74

Post by rout39574 »

pmr_ wrote: post #63
catmanjan wrote: post #3

Neat. Really. I really want to use emacs but I find it hard to justify learning all it's intricacies when I'm only going to use it at certain times while programming. This kills two birds with one stone, gets me off MS Office and into keybind heaven

For some people Emacs acts like a maelstrom for everything you do on a computer. In the beginning you use it to code in one language, then in another language, then you use it for (La)TeX, then you use it as an organizer, then you use it to read your mail, then your RSS feeds, then you embed it into text-fields in your web browser... At some point everything that does not act like Emacs feels annoying and uncooperati…

Amen. Think of 20 years using the grossly identical UI for all those disparate tasks... How much time do you think you lose learning the little quirks of a new app just because you're typing things inside a differently labelled box?

And then you can script or macro all of those processes using the same set of concepts...

Re: 25 years ago I hoped we would extend Emacs to do WYSIWG word processing

#75

Post by thebooktocome »

catmanjan wrote: post #6
tikhonj wrote: post #5

With inline LaTeX previews, we're already surprisingly close. In fact, I'd say that going all the way would be almost a step back. WYSIWYG is ultimately not an ideal editing paradigm: it wins in the short term, being easy to learn, but drags you down in the long term. I've recently started using Quora a bit more. Unlike StackOverflow, they use a WYSIWYG editor. I've found this significantly less convenient than Stack…

Maybe WYSIWYG emacs should use LaTeX on the backend?

LaTeX compilation has never really been fast enough for WYSIWYG, and good luck trying to optimize it.

Re: 25 years ago I hoped we would extend Emacs to do WYSIWG word processing

#76

Post by lmm »

icebraining wrote: post #73
lmm wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Oracle lost the lawsuit, except for the part where Google literally copied one of their classes.

And all they had to do was pay Keker & Van Nest for two years, without knowing whether they'd win or not - and Google didn't even make a VM that can run Java apps! Not to mention that Oracle has appealed, so we still don't know if Google is clear or not. If you want to risk getting yourself or your company involved in that quagmire, by all means do so.

This is FUD, pure and simple. Anyone can be sued for anything.

Re: 25 years ago I hoped we would extend Emacs to do WYSIWG word processing

#77

Post by reuven »

gexla wrote: post #36

> I don't know how to use Org mode, and don't know what it does (it seems to do so many things), but if it displays through Emacs then there are many formatting features that it can't display in a WYSIWYG fashion like Libre Office. I can't believe Stallman doesn't know how to use Org mode. If he is interested in selling people on Emacs, then Org mode is one of the killer features for the presentation. I don't expect…

I completely believe it. First of all, Stallman isn't known for hiding his opinions, or masking his version of the truth.

But beyond that, Stallman has often failed or refused to use technologies that the rest of us take for granted. Years ago, I spoke with him about a proposed bill in the US Congress that would have affected intellectual property laws. (I can't remember the specifics.) At some point, Stallman, who had strongly encouraged people to contact their representatives to oppose the bill, told me that he hadn't actually read it. I told him that it was on the Web, to which he responded, "I don't surf the Web."

Now, I can understand being against certain browsers, servers, and operating systems. But to flat-out refuse to read things on the Web struck me as counterproductive. I don't know if he has changed his attitude toward the Web in the years since, but assume that when he says he doesn't use a certain technology, he means it.

Re: 25 years ago I hoped we would extend Emacs to do WYSIWG word processing

#78

Post by belorn »

reuven wrote: post #77
gexla wrote: post #36

> I don't know how to use Org mode, and don't know what it does (it seems to do so many things), but if it displays through Emacs then there are many formatting features that it can't display in a WYSIWYG fashion like Libre Office. I can't believe Stallman doesn't know how to use Org mode. If he is interested in selling people on Emacs, then Org mode is one of the killer features for the presentation. I don't expect…

I completely believe it. First of all, Stallman isn't known for hiding his opinions, or masking his version of the truth. But beyond that, Stallman has often failed or refused to use technologies that the rest of us take for granted. Years ago, I spoke with him about a proposed bill in the US Congress that would have affected intellectual property laws. (I can't remember the specifics.) At some point, Stallman, who h…

> But to flat-out refuse to read things on the Web

As you described it, he did not actually flat-out refuse. He simply stated that he hasn't read all the documented published on the world wide web, since he don't "surf" the web.

His approach to the web has been described many times. When someone sends him a link that they want him to read, stallman uses the program wget to download the file and reads it offline.

Re: 25 years ago I hoped we would extend Emacs to do WYSIWG word processing

#79

Post by [deleted] »

revelation wrote: post #56
chrisdevereux wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Skype: No way! That's nonfree (freedom-denying) software. > Use Ekiga or an ordinary phone call. It made me wonder what's free-er about an ordinary phone call. Presumably, most of the software the phone companies use is also proprietary. Does it become less non-free if somebody else runs the software? Or maybe it shifts the moral burden of using something non-free to somebody else?

He explains this here: http://stallman.org/stallman-computing.html Paragraph starting with "I firmly refuse.."

[deleted]

Re: 25 years ago I hoped we would extend Emacs to do WYSIWG word processing

#80

Post by RBerenguel »

rout39574 wrote: post #71
gexla wrote: post #36

> I don't know how to use Org mode, and don't know what it does (it seems to do so many things), but if it displays through Emacs then there are many formatting features that it can't display in a WYSIWYG fashion like Libre Office. I can't believe Stallman doesn't know how to use Org mode. If he is interested in selling people on Emacs, then Org mode is one of the killer features for the presentation. I don't expect…

When RMS says he's not familiar with a feature, you can believe him. Org-mode is fantastic, but a very, very recent addition to the Emacs cosmology.

Depends on your definition of "very." It was created 10 years ago, this year. In the grand scheme of the emacs history, it's around a 3rd of the life of emacs already
Post reply on HN