|
|
> From: Xah <xahlee@xxxxxxxxx>
> Date: Tue, 29 Jul 2008 20:55:26 -0700 (PDT)
>
> because 95% of Windows+Linux market share, as well as their use of PC
> keyboards, which has maybe 99.99% market share.
Please tell where did you get these numbers. Are they based on some
survey, or are they just your idea of what they should be?
> > Not all keyboards in the world are PC keyboards.
>
> The argument is not about whether all keyboards in the world are PC
> keyboards.
>
> The point here is that the notation “Alt+‹key›” used a label that
> appears on PC keyboards, the Alt. And PC keyboard has some 99% of
> market share.
Emacs works on more keyboard types than just PC keyboards. And
someone already told you that even on PC keyboards people sometimes
remap their Alt key. As for the 99% figure, see above.
> I wrote:
> • Identical To Key's Label
>
> You retort:
> Only on some keyboards.
>
> That's not reasonable.
Why, what goes against your opinions is necessarily unreasonable?
> > > > > So i consider it more as bug report now i think about it. Why? Because
> > > > > emacs failed to update itself when its keyboard under lisp machines
> > > > > become obsolete.
> >
> > > > You have your history wrong: Meta came from old Sun keyboards, where
> > > > it was marked with a diamond.
> >
> > > Are you saying, that the Sun Microsystem's keyboard precedes Lisp
> > > Machine's keyboard?
> >
> > No, I'm saying that Meta doesn't come from Lisp machines.
>
> Where it came from? And how's the history of Meta is related in this
> argument specifically?
You tell me: you raised this argument in the first place, see above.
> > > So? what is your point?
> >
> > That Emacs embraces change and progress, contrary to your remarks
|
|