Xref: utzoo alt.msdos.programmer:2665 comp.emacs:10706 Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!usc!snorkelwacker.mit.edu!bu.edu!stanford.edu!mcnc!rock.concert.net!robertsr From: robertsr@cs.unca.edu (Ralph Roberts) Newsgroups: alt.msdos.programmer,comp.emacs Subject: Re: EMACS Message-ID: <1991May15.130326.22185@rock.concert.net> Date: 15 May 91 13:03:26 GMT References: <1991May14.202420.26958@cci632.cci.com> Sender: news@rock.concert.net Distribution: usa Organization: University of North Carolina at Asheville Lines: 29 In article nelson@clutx.clarkson.edu (aka NELSON@CLUTX.BITNET) writes: >In article <1991May14.202420.26958@cci632.cci.com> keb@cci632.cci.com (Ken Bernstein) writes: > > Does anyone have experience with both Freemacs and MicroEMACS and have an > *objective* opinion of the two? Or, is there another shareware EMACS for > MS-DOS boxes that is superior to the two that I have mentioned? > >Basically, it's like this: Choose Freemacs if you want the best GNU >Emacs emulation and don't need to edit files >64K. Choose MicroEMACS >if you want to be able to run the exact same program on both DOS and >Unix. I agree! Dr. Mark Boyd and I have just spent the past several months immersed in GNU, Freemacs, MicroEmacs and several comercial variants while writing THE UNIX DESKTOP GUIDE TO EMACS (out in August from Howard W. Sams). In my personal setup (I'm a full-time writer) I have both a Unix system and several DOS boxes. I use Freemacs on DOS and GNU on Unix. If there is a DOS file > 64K to edit, just ship it over to the Unix side ;-). So, for what it's worth, there you have my preference. --Ralph -- Ralph Roberts author@cs.unca.edu | The Desktop Guide to Emacs Asheville, N.C. | Compute!'s Computer Viruses (704) 252-9515 | The Veteran's Guide To Benefits (704) 255-8719 (fax) | + 17 other books & 1000s of articles