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