Path: utzoo!utgpu!water!watmath!clyde!att!osu-cis!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!mailrus!ames!pasteur!ucbvax!HUB.UCSB.EDU!bfox%vision From: bfox%vision@HUB.UCSB.EDU (Brian Fox) Newsgroups: comp.sys.apple Subject: AMACS - ProDOS text editor for the Apple 2 Message-ID: <8806250432.aa08712@SMOKE.BRL.ARPA> Date: 25 Jun 88 08:30:09 GMT References: <8806250359.AA04903@wheaties.ai.mit.edu> Sender: daemon@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU Reply-To: bfox%cornu@hub.ucsb.edu Organization: The Internet Lines: 21 It seems much more likely to me that AMACS is a small subset of Emacs, which, as I mentioned would certainly be very nice in itself. But I'm sure Richard Stallman would prefer you not call it Emacs (or, at least, would prefer that you call it a subset or "ersatz Emacs", as he says...) I work for Richard Stallman; we are writing GNU together, along with others. I don't call my program "Emacs", I call it AMACS. It *is* an Emacs for the Apple; the closest Emacs to it is Twenex Emacs. It is a subset of Gnu Emacs, and it doesn't have a Lisp builtin (this version, anyway) but I wouldn't call it small. Try my demo offer; then decide for yourself. I will be glad to have you review this editor as long as you make public your findings. If you are interested, please reply publicly; you have made your negatice, and unfounded opinions public already. RMS called MINCE an "ersatz emacs"; AMACS is not even close to MINCE in its limitations. Brian Fox