Re: Meanness

[Óscar Fuentes]

David Kastrup <address@hidden> writes:

[snip]

> In contrast to my pretensions.  You forgot to mention that I murder baby
> seals.  Or is this already implied by me being a real disgrace for
> humanity who should get himself fixed?

Please stop this victimising nonsense. I'm talking about attitudes, not
actions.

>> More open hands and less finger pointing, please.
>
> Do you _really_ need to stoop to that level because you can't accept
> that my cost/benefit analysis comes to a different conclusion than
> yours?

The matter here is that you make difficult to discuss your analysis,
because you didn't show it clearly. There are only vagueness about Emacs
hackers being distracted by the Windows port (maybe they are free to
decide what they do with their time?) and NT Emacs being a deterrent for
going the GNU/Linux route (of course, if they were using Visual Studio
it would be much easier the transition to Emacs+Makefiles on GNU/Linux
<g>).

Seriously, what Richard said about NT Emacs being an inconvenient for
transitioning to GNU/Linux seems absurd to me, because my experience
(and my sometimes faulty logic) says the contrary. I don't dispute that
*some* shops may be comfortable enough on Windows thanks to Free
software, but I dispute that Windows ports of Free Software actually are
stopping GNU/Linux adoption on most cases.

Thanks to the plethora of quality Free software available on Windows,
the transition to GNU/Linux was almost a non-issue for me. Perhaps more
important, those tools demonstrate to Windows people that the FS
philosophy may produce good software. Being acquainted with the FS
philosophy itself is just a consequence of this perception. You want to
preach to the infidels, not to the choir, and GNU software on Windows is
preaching loud.

That you dispute this puzzles me to no end, so if you are so kind of
stating your counter-arguments or facts proving me wrong, I'll be glad
to listen.

-- 
Oscar