Re: [O] [OFFTOPIC] The statement on what is orgmode.

[Eric Schulte]

>
> Things you can't do in Emacs that feel as if they *should* be practical,
> even though they currently are not
>
> - Web browsing with ease, and with a full list of currently-expected
>   features (i.e. features to make the general public say "Wow! This is
>   much better than Firefox! I'm switching to this for banking, and for
>   everything else as well!" - not "Umm, why does it look like
>   this?"). This single (admittedly huge) feature, probably along with
>   the next one, are IMO the "killer features" that Emacs does not have.
>
> - Ability to continue working in other buffers when one buffer is
>   busy. Combine this feature and the one mentioned above, and I (perhaps
>   along with a lot of other people) move from two primary every-day
>   applications down to one.
>

I can sympathize with these first two points.  Until the symbolics lisp
machine is resurrected and we return to a world of parens and turtles
all the way down, I've resigned myself to living in a mixed lisp/unix
environment.  That said, I've been able to cobble together an interface
which very closely approximates an Emacs operating system.

1. A tiling window manager (I personally use xmonad [1]).  This lets you
   navigate all of your windows as if they were Emacs buffers, and
   allows one to go hours using multiple applications without having to
   use a mouse.

2. Conkeror [2], a web browser built on the same code base as Firefox,
   which makes web browsing as Emacs-like as possible (e.g., tabs are
   buffers, and most of the main key chords are the same).

The major component my desktop is missing is a system-wide kill ring.
I've used tools which purport to provide this, but have yet to find one
that works the way I want it to.

Cheers,

Footnotes: 
[1]  http://xmonad.org

[2]  http://conkeror.org/

-- 
Eric Schulte
http://cs.unm.edu/~eschulte