Modernizing eMacs?

[removed]

What would you change or propose?

Performance enhancements mostly for modern hardware. I’m kind of afraid to get too deep into org or have too bloated of a config because people say it lags up.

Did you have performance issues? With what?

Why do you write it like "eMacs"? This isn't an Apple product...

Autocorrect on an iPhone. Why does it bother you..? Lol

> ...wondering if there are any plans to make it a full-fledged operating system and/or multithreaded? No. Making a whole OS is a Herculean endeavor, and that's almost definitely not going to happen. Multithreading might happen someday, but it's going to be challenging to implement anything like that without breaking the existing Emacs Lisp code. > Performance enhancements mostly for modern hardware. Like what? The whole point of newer hardware is to run existing software faster. > I’m kind of afraid to get too deep into org or have too bloated of a config because people say it lags up. I suggest that you actually try it before rolling in here asking if the Emacs devs are boiling the ocean because you heard someone say Emacs was slow for them.

This has been removed, as this post is not a strong positive contribution to this sub.

Because it's the wrong name? Your iPhone is autocorrecting because it thinks you're talking about [a completely different product](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EMac).

Are you autistic? Rofl Who cares, it’s the same letters. Given the context of the post, it shouldn’t confuse anyone. Just pretend it’s camel case and I’m a powerful developer. Pretend my m-key only works if I also hold shift. Pretend we are in a different universe and emacs is actually eMacs. Whatever makes you wet. Or just accept that iPhone autocorrects and I don’t need to go back and edit every m for anyone to know what I’m talking about.

What do you have against autism? Be nice, please.

I was just asking a question about something I enjoyed playing with for a little bit… I am trying it… I wasn’t asking any devs to do anything. Hardware and software needs to be compatible to get the most bang for your buck (e.g., it doesn’t matter how many cores you have if your software is single threaded). Startup of eMacs takes like 5-10s with very good modern hardware, with a very reasonable config. I also have seen many posts of people saying that org mode gets sluggish once they really start pushing it.

> Hardware and software needs to be compatible to get the most bang for your buck (e.g., it doesn’t matter how many cores you have if your software is single threaded). Single-threaded code running on a multi-core CPU is compatible. Otherwise, it wouldn't run. > Startup of eMacs takes like 5-10s with very good modern hardware, with a very reasonable config. I also have seen many posts of people saying that org mode gets sluggish once they really start pushing it. Startup time is a poor indicator of overall performance. Emacs works best when you start it once, and keep it running until you turn the computer off. > I also have seen many posts of people saying that org mode gets sluggish once they really start pushing it. This is so vague as to be useless. I use Org Mode it as my primary calendar / todo / notes system, and my main Org repo is 267mb. It's lightning fast on my 7-year-old computer, as it should be: it fits comfortably into system memory, and even old computers are ludicrously fast compared to the 80s machines GNU Emacs was originally developed for.