CD-based distribution (was Another website....)
Tue Aug 18 21:11:00 GMT 1998
> > Why bother with XEmacs then, when NTEmacs is available and just as good?
> Well, although this is somewhat off-topic for this list and has the
> potential for becoming a heated religious war, the short answer is
> that although NTEmacs is nice and has, along with the Cygwin32 stuff,
> made Windows bearable for me, it simply isn't as good as XEmacs.
> I'll just mention a couple of the differences that are reasons I
> prefer XEmacs (snipped from the XEmacs FAQ, which can be found at
> http://www.xemacs.org/faq/xemacs-faq.html ):
> Many more bundled packages than GNU Emacs (e.g. VM).
> Binaries are available for many common operating systems.
> Face support on TTY's.
> A built-in toolbar.
> Better Motif compliance.
> Variable-width fonts.
> Variable-height lines.
> ToolTalk support.
> Horizontal and vertical scrollbars (using real toolkit scrollbars).
> The ability to embed arbitrary graphics in a buffer.
I know this is off topic, but is there a port of XEmacs for Windows
NT, the last time I looked at the XEmacs site there wasn't one
For help on using this list (especially unsubscribing), send a message to
"firstname.lastname@example.org" with one line of text: "help".
More information about the Cygwin