Firefox versus Emacs

Please compose all posts in Emacs.

Moderators: phlip, Moderators General, Prelates

zenten
Posts: 3799
Joined: Fri Jun 22, 2007 7:42 am UTC
Location: Ottawa, Canada

Firefox versus Emacs

Postby zenten » Fri Dec 07, 2007 6:34 pm UTC

Firefox is a much better OS than Emacs is. It's not like Emacs has Greasemonkey.

User avatar
Endless Mike
Posts: 3204
Joined: Thu Dec 06, 2007 3:04 pm UTC

Re: Firefox versus Emacs

Postby Endless Mike » Fri Dec 07, 2007 6:43 pm UTC

I agree, but Photoshop is way better than both of them. Neither of those are Creative Suites.

User avatar
Cheese
and spam. (Euggh)
Posts: 3909
Joined: Mon Jul 02, 2007 2:04 pm UTC
Location: ¿burning you?

Re: Firefox versus Emacs

Postby Cheese » Fri Dec 07, 2007 9:47 pm UTC

Hey, what about Minesweeper? It beats everything else hands down!
(6, 48, 159)
hermaj wrote:No-one. Will. Be. Taking. Cheese's. Spot.
Spoiler:
LE4dGOLEM wrote:Cheese is utterly correct on all fronts.
SecondTalon wrote:That thing that Cheese just said. Do that.
Meaux_Pas wrote:I hereby disagree and declare Cheese to be brilliant.
Image

User avatar
Anpheus
I can't get any worse, can I?
Posts: 860
Joined: Fri Nov 16, 2007 10:38 pm UTC
Location: A privileged frame of reference.

Re: Firefox versus Emacs

Postby Anpheus » Fri Dec 07, 2007 9:55 pm UTC

It's true, Minesweeper is turing complete.
Spoiler:

Code: Select all

  /###\_________/###\
  |#################|
  \#################/
   |##┌         ┐##|
   |##  (¯`v´¯)  ##|
   |##  `\ ♥ /´  ##|
   |##   `\¸/´   ##|
   |##└         ┘##|
  /#################\
  |#################|
  \###/¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯\###/

Rysto
Posts: 1460
Joined: Wed Mar 21, 2007 4:07 am UTC

Re: Firefox versus Emacs

Postby Rysto » Fri Dec 07, 2007 11:24 pm UTC

Firefox extensions are written in Javascript.
Emacs extensions are written in Lisp.

Come on, there's no contest here, and this is coming from a guy who doesn't even like functional languages all that much.

User avatar
Matthias
Posts: 275
Joined: Wed Sep 12, 2007 4:55 am UTC
Location: Out of context, probably.
Contact:

Re: Firefox versus Emacs

Postby Matthias » Sat Dec 08, 2007 5:16 am UTC

You're mom's Turing complete, and she uses Javasthcript (which is like Javascript, only with a Lisp).
Love may be blind, but lust has x-ray vision.
Avatar shamelessly plucked from PMOG.

Also, it turns out I'm not dead--I'm just a right bastard who disappears from the internet for months at a time every so often.

HappySmileMan
Posts: 52
Joined: Fri Nov 09, 2007 11:46 pm UTC

Re: Firefox versus Emacs

Postby HappySmileMan » Sun Dec 09, 2007 5:30 pm UTC

Endless Mike wrote:I agree, but Photoshop is way better than both of them. Neither of those are Creative Suites.


I'm pretty sure emacs has a mode for that.

(who said that first, it applies to EVERYTHING!)

User avatar
evilbeanfiend
Posts: 2650
Joined: Tue Mar 13, 2007 7:05 am UTC
Location: the old world

Re: Firefox versus Emacs

Postby evilbeanfiend » Mon Dec 10, 2007 11:34 am UTC

Anpheus wrote:It's true, Minesweeper is turing complete.


surely only if you are allowed infinite grids, on a fixed size grid its a finite state machine.

it did get 100% in pc gamer recently however which definitely beats both emacs and firefox.
in ur beanz makin u eveel

User avatar
pieaholicx
The cake is a lie!
Posts: 531
Joined: Mon Oct 22, 2007 12:51 pm UTC
Contact:

Re: Firefox versus Emacs

Postby pieaholicx » Mon Dec 10, 2007 1:38 pm UTC

I dunno. I'm thinking WoW may be the better OS.
It's okay, I'm Chaotic Neutral. I can kill him over the loot.
Overexposure to pieaholicx may, in semi-rare cases, emancipate dental fillings, crowns, tooth enamel, and teeth.

User avatar
Tei
Posts: 63
Joined: Fri Nov 30, 2007 2:58 pm UTC

Re: Firefox versus Emacs

Postby Tei » Mon Dec 10, 2007 1:50 pm UTC

I am XUL developer, and I create applications for Firefox.

IMHO Emacs maybe is better, because the scripting interpreter is faster on Emacs.
What about Javascript multithread or excepcion handling?

To have a good editor on Firefox, you need to embed SciTe. While Emacs as one editor builtin.

User avatar
LDJosh
Posts: 242
Joined: Fri Oct 26, 2007 6:07 pm UTC
Location: South Central, PA
Contact:

Re: Firefox versus Emacs

Postby LDJosh » Mon Dec 10, 2007 1:54 pm UTC

pssh. newbs.
I run all my apps in a VM instance of Notepad.
--------
~Lameduck Josh
ninjajosh.com

User avatar
Aluminus
Posts: 1337
Joined: Sun Nov 04, 2007 7:51 pm UTC
Location: View From Space

Re: Firefox versus Emacs

Postby Aluminus » Mon Dec 10, 2007 2:00 pm UTC

My toaster runs Notepad on an 8-bit microprocessor made out of spoons.
If the toast pops up, the bit is 1.
If the toast does not pop up, the bit is 0.
If both slices of toast pop up, it begins a newline (\n).
fyrenwater wrote:Oh dear God, I just imagined this horrible scenario of a psychotic non-people-person running around, trying to steal the people-person section of people-peoples' brains to implant into their own brain.

User avatar
Endless Mike
Posts: 3204
Joined: Thu Dec 06, 2007 3:04 pm UTC

Re: Firefox versus Emacs

Postby Endless Mike » Mon Dec 10, 2007 3:28 pm UTC

HappySmileMan wrote:
Endless Mike wrote:I agree, but Photoshop is way better than both of them. Neither of those are Creative Suites.


I'm pretty sure emacs has a mode for that.

(who said that first, it applies to EVERYTHING!)

Maybe, but Photoshop has is right in the name. Have you ever seen emacs creative suite? I don't think so. Also, Adobe lives in the modern age where capital letters exist unlike emacs which is a relic of lowercase.

User avatar
davean
Site Ninja
Posts: 2498
Joined: Sat Apr 08, 2006 7:50 am UTC
Contact:

Re: Firefox versus Emacs

Postby davean » Tue Dec 11, 2007 12:14 am UTC

Endless Mike wrote:Maybe, but Photoshop has is right in the name. Have you ever seen emacs creative suite? I don't think so. Also, Adobe lives in the modern age where capital letters exist unlike emacs which is a relic of lowercase.


Maybe you need to review our history. Lowercase letters are the new kids on the block.

User avatar
Matthias
Posts: 275
Joined: Wed Sep 12, 2007 4:55 am UTC
Location: Out of context, probably.
Contact:

Re: Firefox versus Emacs

Postby Matthias » Tue Dec 11, 2007 12:23 am UTC

Microsoft Paint.

Bitches.

[/thread]
Love may be blind, but lust has x-ray vision.
Avatar shamelessly plucked from PMOG.

Also, it turns out I'm not dead--I'm just a right bastard who disappears from the internet for months at a time every so often.

User avatar
Anpheus
I can't get any worse, can I?
Posts: 860
Joined: Fri Nov 16, 2007 10:38 pm UTC
Location: A privileged frame of reference.

Re: Firefox versus Emacs

Postby Anpheus » Tue Dec 11, 2007 12:29 am UTC

Paint.NET is actually pretty good, I hear. It's a very lightweight application (not as lightweight as Paint though) that has a lot of the features most people would want to use in Photoshop without having to wait half an hour for Photoshop to open. (Though CS3 seems to open faster than CS1 and CS2...)
Spoiler:

Code: Select all

  /###\_________/###\
  |#################|
  \#################/
   |##┌         ┐##|
   |##  (¯`v´¯)  ##|
   |##  `\ ♥ /´  ##|
   |##   `\¸/´   ##|
   |##└         ┘##|
  /#################\
  |#################|
  \###/¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯\###/

User avatar
Flying Betty
Posts: 1147
Joined: Tue Jul 10, 2007 9:25 am UTC
Location: Next Tuesday

Re: Firefox versus Emacs

Postby Flying Betty » Tue Dec 11, 2007 12:53 am UTC

Aluminus wrote:My toaster runs Notepad on an 8-bit microprocessor made out of spoons.
If the toast pops up, the bit is 1.
If the toast does not pop up, the bit is 0.
If both slices of toast pop up, it begins a newline (\n).


And what do you make it do to have it grow an arm and stab you?
Belial wrote:The future is here, and it is cyberpunk as hell.

User avatar
Aluminus
Posts: 1337
Joined: Sun Nov 04, 2007 7:51 pm UTC
Location: View From Space

Re: Firefox versus Emacs

Postby Aluminus » Tue Dec 11, 2007 1:13 am UTC

That's debug_mode 8)
fyrenwater wrote:Oh dear God, I just imagined this horrible scenario of a psychotic non-people-person running around, trying to steal the people-person section of people-peoples' brains to implant into their own brain.

User avatar
Iamwalrus
Posts: 17
Joined: Fri Dec 14, 2007 2:06 am UTC

Re: Firefox versus Emacs

Postby Iamwalrus » Tue Jan 08, 2008 11:30 pm UTC

pieaholicx wrote:I dunno. I'm thinking WoW may be the better OS.


Hell yeah, betch e.e;
You are now breathing manually.

User avatar
stockpot
Posts: 217
Joined: Sat Oct 20, 2007 3:37 am UTC

Re: Firefox versus Emacs

Postby stockpot » Wed Jan 09, 2008 10:39 am UTC

I dunno. Can you label bodies of water in Minesweeper? Or graph population density on a map? ArcGIS is a lot better.

Xbehave
Posts: 54
Joined: Wed Jan 09, 2008 4:45 am UTC

Re: Firefox versus Emacs

Postby Xbehave » Wed Jan 09, 2008 12:41 pm UTC

lol i like the randomness of the thread but in response to the 1st post i did used to have Firefox in emacs mode once, but then i switched to linux and realised, "hey i have an OS maybe i should use it"
although you forgot amarok, its just a matter of time till they embed firefox in the discover your music mode meaning amarok will be a hypervisor right? But then firefox can already control amarok meaning that there's a clear issue with privilege escalation, or you could place your amarok in a firefox making firefox a supervisor...which in turn turns amarok into a superduperhypervisor!
GENERATION 20: The first time you see this, copy it into your sig on any forum and add 1 to the generation. Social experiment.

User avatar
pieaholicx
The cake is a lie!
Posts: 531
Joined: Mon Oct 22, 2007 12:51 pm UTC
Contact:

Re: Firefox versus Emacs

Postby pieaholicx » Wed Jan 09, 2008 1:00 pm UTC

Xbehave wrote:lol i like the randomness of the thread but in response to the 1st post i did used to have Firefox in emacs mode once, but then i switched to linux and realised, "hey i have an OS maybe i should use it"
although you forgot amarok, its just a matter of time till they embed firefox in the discover your music mode meaning amarok will be a hypervisor right? But then firefox can already control amarok meaning that there's a clear issue with privilege escalation, or you could place your amarok in a firefox making firefox a supervisor...which in turn turns amarok into a superduperhypervisor!

I have no idea what you just said, but I believe I saw Firefox embedded in Amarok, and I would like to point out that Songbird is built on Mozilla technologies, and has a web browser built-in. Oh yes, and they're working on porting the top 40 requested Firefox extensions to it. So I guess that Songbird is a pretty decent OS too.
It's okay, I'm Chaotic Neutral. I can kill him over the loot.
Overexposure to pieaholicx may, in semi-rare cases, emancipate dental fillings, crowns, tooth enamel, and teeth.

User avatar
enk
Posts: 754
Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2007 12:20 am UTC
Location: Aalborg, Denmark
Contact:

Re: Firefox versus Emacs

Postby enk » Wed Jan 09, 2008 2:49 pm UTC

You beat me to it.. yes, Songbird has the Gecko engine built in.

But is it a nice music player? No. Not besides the mp3-sniffing browsing experience.

But then again, I don't like iTunes or Amarok either. I prefer the smaller ones - screen real estate wise - like Winamp or Foobar2000.


Edit: Those music players bring me back to the OS theme a little. I've got both Winamp and Firefox built into Windows. Not code wise, but by the functionality of global hotkeys. Global hotkeys for music control is kinda common, but "New tab" in Firefox as a global hotkey? Combined with my homebrewed CLI style start page, it makes finding info sooo fast. [/rant]
phlip wrote:Ha HA! Recycled emacs jokes.

User avatar
pieaholicx
The cake is a lie!
Posts: 531
Joined: Mon Oct 22, 2007 12:51 pm UTC
Contact:

Re: Firefox versus Emacs

Postby pieaholicx » Wed Jan 09, 2008 3:56 pm UTC

enk wrote:But then again, I don't like iTunes or Amarok either. I prefer the smaller ones - screen real estate wise - like Winamp or Foobar2000.

Yeah, that would be one of its downfalls. It takes up a bit of space. Oh, and the default theme is all black, except all the lists, which are white. It burns my eyes so bad.
It's okay, I'm Chaotic Neutral. I can kill him over the loot.
Overexposure to pieaholicx may, in semi-rare cases, emancipate dental fillings, crowns, tooth enamel, and teeth.

User avatar
Amnesiasoft
Posts: 2573
Joined: Tue May 15, 2007 4:28 am UTC
Location: Colorado
Contact:

Re: Firefox versus Emacs

Postby Amnesiasoft » Wed Jan 09, 2008 4:41 pm UTC

Pfft, a PhysX card makes a better OS than those, even without software!

_Pi
Posts: 4
Joined: Fri Dec 28, 2007 6:12 pm UTC

Re: Firefox versus Emacs

Postby _Pi » Tue Feb 26, 2008 11:09 am UTC

Edit: Those music players bring me back to the OS theme a little. I've got both Winamp and Firefox built into Windows. Not code wise, but by the functionality of global hotkeys. Global hotkeys for music control is kinda common, but "New tab" in Firefox as a global hotkey? Combined with my homebrewed CLI style start page, it makes finding info sooo fast. [/rant]


Windows? Since when has that been an OS?

I'm running IE as my OS. It only has three features. "Turn On", "Blue Screen of Death" and "Turn Off". Very compact little thing.

User avatar
Endless Mike
Posts: 3204
Joined: Thu Dec 06, 2007 3:04 pm UTC

Re: Firefox versus Emacs

Postby Endless Mike » Tue Feb 26, 2008 4:30 pm UTC

I run Lucas electronics as my OS.

I like the "Flicker" app. It's not as fun as "Spark" but at least it doesn't set things on fire.

EvanED
Posts: 4331
Joined: Mon Aug 07, 2006 6:28 am UTC
Location: Madison, WI
Contact:

Re: Firefox versus Emacs

Postby EvanED » Tue Feb 26, 2008 4:36 pm UTC

_Pi wrote:Windows? Since when has that been an OS?

I'm running IE as my OS. It only has three features. "Turn On", "Blue Screen of Death" and "Turn Off". Very compact little thing.

(-1, Flamebait)

But we'll let it go because this is Religious Wars and he's Irish, so I can just send DaveF over to smack him around a bit. :D - Hammer

User avatar
Benny the Bear
Posts: 146
Joined: Sat Oct 27, 2007 2:44 am UTC
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Contact:

Re: Firefox versus Emacs

Postby Benny the Bear » Sun Mar 09, 2008 9:54 am UTC

I just use an abacus, screw emax and flamefox. :)

User avatar
Anpheus
I can't get any worse, can I?
Posts: 860
Joined: Fri Nov 16, 2007 10:38 pm UTC
Location: A privileged frame of reference.

Re: Firefox versus Emacs

Postby Anpheus » Sun Mar 09, 2008 9:56 am UTC

I hooked up my phone line to several Morse Code machines designed to emit signals of different frequencies and a single speaker, and I download web pages at about 200 baud by handwriting and reading the packets.
Spoiler:

Code: Select all

  /###\_________/###\
  |#################|
  \#################/
   |##┌         ┐##|
   |##  (¯`v´¯)  ##|
   |##  `\ ♥ /´  ##|
   |##   `\¸/´   ##|
   |##└         ┘##|
  /#################\
  |#################|
  \###/¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯\###/

Noughmad
Posts: 41
Joined: Wed Jan 09, 2008 8:38 pm UTC
Contact:

Re: Firefox versus Emacs

Postby Noughmad » Sun Mar 09, 2008 10:19 am UTC

I run the ButterflyOS.
Laziness is the mother of wisdom.
My woblag

The Finn
Posts: 23
Joined: Thu Mar 06, 2008 4:47 pm UTC

Re: Firefox versus Emacs

Postby The Finn » Tue Mar 11, 2008 3:44 pm UTC

I find the iPod shuffle to be the superior OS, as it can implement a far larger MTU when piggybacked on the physical medium per RFC_1149.

Unfortunately, bandwidth is mutable and limited to between 128kbps and 960kbps, with the most robust being the 300bps_n_8_1 mode. Where would I be without IBM?

Throughput is limited to a timeshifted realtime, which is sufficient for my sonic UI needs.

edge walker
Posts: 35
Joined: Thu Mar 13, 2008 5:04 pm UTC

Re: Firefox versus Emacs

Postby edge walker » Thu Mar 13, 2008 6:51 pm UTC

Rysto wrote:Firefox extensions are written in Javascript.
Emacs extensions are written in Lisp.

Come on, there's no contest here, and this is coming from a guy who doesn't even like functional languages all that much.

Javascript is a full-fledged functional language (in the same sense that Lisp is, anyway).

User avatar
Mortabis
Posts: 50
Joined: Fri Feb 08, 2008 12:24 am UTC

Re: Firefox versus Emacs

Postby Mortabis » Wed Apr 23, 2008 1:09 am UTC

Aluminus wrote:My toaster runs Notepad on an 8-bit microprocessor made out of spoons.
If the toast pops up, the bit is 1.
If the toast does not pop up, the bit is 0.
If both slices of toast pop up, it begins a newline (\n).


You're cheating! That toaster is running NetBSD! :lol:
Image


Return to “Religious Wars”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests