[DonHopkins]

It only proves nothing if you didn't bother reading it (which you words "wall of text" imply) and didn't check any of the links proving what I said. Instead of dismissing everything by handwaving, please tell me which specific points I made that you disagree with, and what is your evidence?

How long have you been using Emacs, yourself? If you just got started a few years ago, then that excuses your ignorance of history (but not your unwillingness to learn), but there is a LOT of well documented history about Emacs on the Mac, and all those links you didn't bother following prove it.

You can't win an argument by being ignorant of history, claiming tl;dr, and refusing to look at the evidence. That's just conceding my points by default. Can you do any better than that?

[slowmovintarget]

It feels like this changed roughly in the last five years. That's about how long I've been using Emacs on Mac.

I'd mostly been using Sublime / Atom / Eclipse / Vim before that (and a long list of other IDEs and editors going back to Turbo Pascal 3.0 on IBM XTs). So perhaps I've not felt the same pain.

I'm glad I can use Emacs at work (on Macs) and at home (on Linux). The funny thing is it's been easier to get Emacs up and running on Mac than on Linux. To get the latest stable Emacs I had to pull the source and build it myself (Ubuntu repos had old versions). On Mac it was just finding the right cask in Homebrew.

[DonHopkins]

>It feels like this changed roughly in the last five years.

Hmm, that's about how long ago RMS got "canceled" and resigned from the FSF board (September 2019). Go figure!

[ubermonkey]

The point is that you came in here with a pasted wall of text with a whole bunch of urls claiming emacs users on MacOS are somehow 3rd class citizens because ... of things from long ago, I guess.

My point, Don, is that these long-ago issues are now irrelevant. Your position here runs utterly counter to the lived experience of Mac emacs users.

I don't care what RMS did in 2005. It's not relevant to using emacs on a Mac in 2025.

I don't even need to care about the history of emacs on the Mac, or whatever other ill-advised chicanery the FSF has committed on this or any other point (and, not to put too fine a point on it, but at 55 I've seen plenty of goofy own-goals from that crowd).

What matters now is "gee, how easy is it for a Mac user to access and use emacs productively?" That answer, for at least the last 8 to 10 years (which is also the answer to your gatekeepy question), has been "very!" You open terminal and type "emacs," or you download a build that runs as a gui from any of several maintainers. You're done.

It's about as simple as it is to run it on a Linux box (which I also do), and far simpler than getting it to behave under Windows (and I have those scars, too).

So what was your point again?

[tom_]

My thoughts too. I've never had any real problems running it on Windows myself, but it doesn't feel like Mac users are any worse off.

I've been using Mac Emacs since about 2010, so perhaps I dodged some of the worst stuff, and it's always felt - for good or for ill - very much the same as using it on Windows or Linux/X-Windows, both of which I've been using since 2005 or so.

I've always used the standard GNU version rather than any specific Mac port. Over the years I'll have done some mix of downloading prebuilt binaries, building it from source, or getting the MacPorts version.

Perhaps I have missed out on some Fancy Extra Mac Stuff, the sort of thing that would come as standard with any project that took the platform seriously, but it's never really felt like a problem. And indeed, I figure if I'm happy enough with it running on X-Windows and on Windows, why wouldn't I be just as happy with exactly the same thing on macOS too? A consistent (or near enough) cross-platform experience is part of why I use Emacs anyway.

[DonHopkins]

My sweet summer child.

[ubermonkey]

This isn't much of an argument, Don. Just being condescending may be charming somewhere else, but here it just looks like you're being a jerk -- and a jerk without much that's relevant to add to the conversation.

[DonHopkins]

Do you really believe that RMS has suddenly done a 180 and changed his core beliefs and philosophy about Apple and Macs and non-free operating systems?

Do you even know him, have you ever talked with him about free software or copyleft, have you ever even read anything he's written? Are you brand new to this whole "free software" thing, and it's a total shock to you that RMS has a long standing opinion about supporting Macs and other non-free operating systems?

It's obvious you haven't read any of the links to evidence I posted, or even anything RMS has written about the subject, but you really should do some research before jumping to such historically uninformed conclusions.

Parading your self cultivated ignorance and unwillingness to read, enumerating things you don't care about, and refusing to indicate what I wrote that you disagree with or provide any evidence to the contrary after I asked you to, just isn't a good look, and won't win any arguments that I have nothing to add to the conversation.

One more time: what evidence I gave do you disagree with, and what evidence do you have than RMS has done a 180 and abandoned his long held principles? Do you even know what those principles are?

[ubermonkey]

RMS is functionally irrelevant to the experience of someone on a Mac who wants to use emacs, because -- Again! -- all you have to do is download a build and you're off to the races.

That's the end of the discussion. It doesn't matter what RMS' position is. (And yes, I know what those are -- and no, I've never spoken to him, because I tend to avoid creeps.)

emacs is free software that, once released to the world, will find its way into many places perhaps its most famous proponent would prefer it not. And this happens because his opinion is irrelevant. This has happened before. This will happen again. RMS being a sad puppy about Macs and Windows doesn't change the fact that many, many folks have productive emacs-centered computing experiences on those platforms. He can die mad about it.

You posted a shitton of material, but none of it addressed the simple fact that using emacs on a Mac is approximately as easy as using it on (e.g.) Debian. There's no real difference for most use cases.

I'm not in the habit of taking homework from gish-galloping boomers hell bent on missing the point, so I'm not going to answer any of your questions. I will, however, note that I'm far from the only person in this thread looking at you and thinking "what the hell is this guy on about?"

[sexyman48]

Your litany of butthurt actually bolsters my opinion of the bozos at emacs-devel, who I've long criticized for hypocritically advancing emacs on proprietary os's despite their ostensible mission to destroy them.

[DonHopkins]

You seem to think there is only one version of Emacs, and that its entire monolithic developer community is totally unified in its opinion and philosophy and mission, so you can accuse the entire community of being hypocritical if there is any dissent or diversity or competition.

I just wrote a long list of proprietary operating systems one version of Emacs ran on, and even linked to the source code proving it, which RMS opposes so vehemently that he calls it "Software Hoarder Emacs", and jokingly accuses its developers of burning his house down.

If you really think RMS's mission to destroy all non-free operating systems is "ostensible", you definitely don't know him or his reputation.

>ostensible /ɒˈstɛn(t)sɪbl/ adjective: stated or appearing to be true, but not necessarily so.

[sexyman48]

You're overcomplicating this. If RMS and his lackeys were so hellbent on ridding prop OS's from the world, they could move marginally closer to that goal by simply deleting w32* ns* and android* from GNU Emacs. That they instead collectively spend several man-months per year stressing about their upkeep means they care more about expanding their userbase than any bullshit notion of "freedom."