Re: Issues with emacs

[Dustin Hemmerling]

notbob <notbob@nothome.com> writes:

> On 2012-06-26, Tom <adatgyujto@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>> But it's also a possible that a skilled developer could make a
>> permanent living from developing Emacs features.
>
> Does emacs REALLY need MORE features!?  It's already so complex, now,
> as to seem almost unfathomable to many.  What emacs needs is some
> refining, perhaps even some simplification.  I use slrn cuz it's much
> easier to follow, use, and config than gnus, even though they're
> basically the same utility.  Another thing that can't hurt is better
> documentation.  The only thing more arcane and vague than the official
> emacs manual are those geeky man pages.  One could also make some
> money off documentation.  I paid hard cash for the emacs O'Reilly books
> and consider it money well spent.  In fact, I need to buy the 3rd
> edition and probably will.
>
> nb

I'm glad to hear you had success with the O'Reilly book, because I had
the exact opposite experience.  I found it totally superficial compared
to both the official Emacs and Elisp Info manuals, outdated, and far
below O'Reilly's often very meagre standards.  I read my copy at the
library, because I wouldn't pay hard, soft, cold, or hot cash for
anything even tangentially connected to esr.  The integrated manuals and
the self-documenting features are some of my favourite features of
Emacs, personally.

-- 
Dustin Hemmerling.