Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/5/84; site osu-eddie.UUCP Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!cbosgd!osu-eddie!karl From: karl@osu-eddie.UUCP (Karl Kleinpaste) Newsgroups: net.emacs Subject: Re: Emacs cost Message-ID: <148@osu-eddie.UUCP> Date: Mon, 4-Mar-85 07:12:46 EST Article-I.D.: osu-eddi.148 Posted: Mon Mar 4 07:12:46 1985 Date-Received: Tue, 5-Mar-85 02:59:52 EST References: <172@encore.UUCP> <137@osu-eddie.UUCP> <1127@godot.UUCP> Organization: You really don't want to know Lines: 28 ---------- >>In conclusion, then: No, there is no public domain Gosling's Emacs. Yes, >>there are versions you can get, with some difficulty, without paying the >>(rather high) price which Unipress charges. No, Mr Gosling will not want to >>give permission to do so very often. > >For a piece of code as complicated and as useful as Emacs (either CCA's / >Zimmerman's or Unipress's / Goslings) the 'rather high' price which is >charged is ridiculously low! ---------- Umm...OK, you think it's a low price. I, personally, view it as somewhat high. It's a matter of perception, I guess. Knowing that other editors are out there, some of them very good and in the public domain, I happen to view it as a bit on the expensive side. Personal opinion, and all that. Anyway, I've also been informed in the mail that my comments about the proprietary nature of Emacs were incorrect. Someone from UCB tells me that there are in fact *2* versions of Gosling-derived Emacs which are being "freely distributed," and he suggested that I watch net.emacs for details. Frankly, I'm waiting not-so-patiently, because I'd like to get in on this good information myself, and get a better version than that which I've got right now. Ah, well; it looks like I made a pretty large mistake; sorry about that, folks. "Confusion will be my epitaph," as King Crimson said... -- Karl Kleinpaste @ Bell Labs, Columbus 614/860-5107 +==-> cbrma!kk @ Ohio State University 614/422-0915 osu-eddie!karl