KFL@mit-mc.arpa (Keith F. Lynch) (03/05/86)
Does anyone know if EMACS is trademarked? Can anyone market a program and call it EMACS? Please reply to me, I am not on this list. ...Keith
KFL@mit-mc.arpa (Keith F. Lynch) (03/06/86)
From: phr@calder.berkeley.edu (Paul Rubin)
Emacs is not trademarked. ...
There is not much point in writing a new, extensible Emacs, and trying
to market it any more (since anyone can get GNU Emacs for free).
Well, GNU Emacs is not available for MS-DOS machines. It requires
525k of memory, which is more than most MS-DOS machines have
available anyway. And it costs $165 to order.
I think there is a great market for an editor which has everything
Emacs has EXCEPT the built in Lisp, and which is relatively small and
is available for for $30 to $60 or so.
...Keithphr@ernie.berkeley.edu (Paul Rubin) (03/06/86)
From KFL@MC.LCS.MIT.EDU Wed Mar 5 18:10:39 1986 From: "Keith F. Lynch" <KFL@MC.LCS.MIT.EDU> Subject: emacs Well, GNU Emacs is not available for MS-DOS machines. It requires 525k of memory, which is more than most MS-DOS machines have available anyway. And it costs $165 to order. I think there is a great market for an editor which has everything Emacs has EXCEPT the built in Lisp, and which is relatively small and is available for for $30 to $60 or so. ...Keith The $165 (actually $150) is a tape copying fee; you don't have to pay anything to get a copy of GNU Emacs (just copy it from someone who has it, or ftp it from mit-prep. See net.emacs or the equivalent arpa lists for info on how to do this). $150 is what FSF charges to ship a tape regardless of what is on it. You get a some other software on that tape as well, such as a yacc-compatible parser generator and the all important hack game. Several ersatz (i.e., non-extensible) emacses are being marketed more or less the way you describe. But why get any of them, when you can get Jove or MicroEmacs? There are public domain versions of both of these, and they are quite small. Please move this discussion away from info-law.
bde@ucbvax.berkeley.edu (03/06/86)
Using EMACS as the name of a program, even if the name is not copyrighted, could cause some *very specific* expectations about the nature of the program. I don't know the status of "EMACS" per say. Do know that is was originally a front end for TECO on DEC equipment. EMACS == Editor, Macroes... or some such. The relation to TECO is similar to the relation between vi(1) and ed(1) on UN*X systems. Hope this helps...
ron@brl-smoke.ARPA (Ron Natalie <ron>) (03/06/86)
> I don't know the status of "EMACS" per say. Do know that is was > originally a front end for TECO on DEC equipment. EMACS == Editor, > Macroes... or some such. The relation to TECO is similar to the > relation between vi(1) and ed(1) on UN*X systems. First off, DEC didn't write or support either EMACS or TECO. TECO came from the user's group and EMACS was written by RMS. -Ron
rwillis@bbn-labs-b.arpa (Robert Willis) (03/06/86)
An Emacs-like editor for MS-DOS is EPSILON, created by Lugaru Software Ltd. It costs roughly $150.00. It has all the usual features -- dynamic key binding, apropos commands, multiple buffers, ability to create process windows, etc. One unusual feature is that their extensibility language, EEL, is based on C instead of Lisp! Bob