Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!cs.utexas.edu!usc!apple!ames!ncar!boulder!raney From: raney@boulder.Colorado.EDU (Scott Raney) Newsgroups: comp.emacs Subject: Re: Summary: Gosling/UniPress vs GNU emacs Keywords: Gosling, UniPress, GNU Message-ID: <15827@boulder.Colorado.EDU> Date: 18 Jan 90 17:52:50 GMT References: <113@pellan.UUCP> Sender: news@boulder.Colorado.EDU Reply-To: raney@gabor.Colorado.EDU (Scott Raney) Organization: University of Colorado, Boulder Lines: 32 The review of Unipress Emacs that I have been working on for Unix World magazine is about done. I'm not sure what month it will be published, but it should be within a couple (March? April?). Apologies to those who sent me info that I didn't thank personally, please consider this a thank you note. In my comparison of GNU with Unipress Emacs there were two points that were especially noteworthy. The first is the relative stability of the editors. GNU is rock-solid, whereas Unipress (at least version 2.2 on HP 9000/300's) is really buggy. Even after I got an updated version from Unipress (corrupted files on their distribution system), there were numerous bugs, especially in the X interface. I think this is unacceptable in a commercial product. The second is the level of support. I'd trade Unipress's whole tech-support department for one GNU guru with a little free time. The level of support and communication available from the news groups and email to other GNU Emacs users is far superior to that available from any commercial software company that I have had experience with. As a software consultant, I feel somewhat somewhat threatened by the idea that free software can really work. But as the FSF and the members of the GNU community have shown, it clearly can. Scott Raney ====================================================================== Scott Raney No other person or organization raney@gabor.colorado.edu can be held responsible for my (303)492-7709 or (303)499-9855 opinions or actions