Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site osu-dbs.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!philabs!seismo!harpo!floyd!clyde!ihnp4!cbosgd!osu-dbs!paul
From: paul@osu-dbs.UUCP
Newsgroups: net.emacs
Subject: Who likes which Emacs
Message-ID: <392@osu-dbs.UUCP>
Date: Tue, 15-Nov-83 17:23:03 EST
Article-I.D.: osu-dbs.392
Posted: Tue Nov 15 17:23:03 1983
Date-Received: Sat, 19-Nov-83 00:45:46 EST
Sender: paul@osu-dbs.UUCP
Organization: Ohio State U., CIS Dept., Columbus
Lines: 20

From: paul
I just thought I'd put in my two cent's worth on the subject of CCA vs.
UniPress...  Here at OSU, most of the users use CCA emacs; Not because
it has good docs., but because its like Twenex EMACS.  Most of the real
Unix hackers use Gosling's version because it's programmable and
handles unix a little bit better.  I myself started on CCA, but now use
Gosling's all the time.  I have heard it said that people who want to
start on emacs use CCA but those who want to get work done use
Gosling's version.  I must agree, mostly because CCA emacs is very much
like the Twenex version, and I don't like Twenex EMACS.  I might use
CCA instead if it were programmable and more powerful (ex: more than
two windows), and I would like Gosling's version much better if it had
real documentation.

I could rant and rave for hours, but...

				Paul W. Placeway
				The Ohio State University
				(UUCP: cbosgd!osu-dbs!paul)
				The opinions expressed are my own...