Commercial code is better: Cedega VS Wine 3354
Never heard of Cedega. Haven't a clue how you'd even pronounce it. I do hope you had the decency to send Wine a bug report.
From now on, you're trolling, aren't you? Still, I'll feed you once.
Good well motivated developers working in good conditions produce good software. Sometimes.
Linux kernels aren't used on unix systems. But no, the Linux kernel was more than half decent before Red Hat came to be.
Without Red Hat, these guys would still be working on Linux. It's great that they get some money out of it, though.
That's not quite accurate. "Old" Emacs has kept up, more than barely, and surged ahead. Probably, the tears were because the deepest principle of freedom was understood differently by RMS and his fellow hackers, but those differences hadn't manifested themselves before.
A figure plucked out of the air?
RMS will only allow well written code into GNU Emacs. If it's not readily understandable, then it's too complex to maintain, and quite likely, too complex to use. Often, he's rejected proposed features, saying "yes that's fine, but we don't really need it". XEmacs has suffered from accepting "advanced" code from people who have subsequently vanished, leaving their bugs behind.
Funny, that - My computer OS is free software, I'm writing this article with free software, and it will get dispatched into Usenet by Free software, and I write free software. Hey, that's four impossible things, and before breakfast. The red queen would be proud of me!
Commercial software has to work better or else customers will not pay for it. If something is free and has a use, people will use it without complaining much and those impoverished folk who cannot...
The best software is the stuff that works.
There's an excellent free program called ispell, by the way. ;-)
For some value of "supported", and some value of "7 years".
-- Alan Mackenzie (Munich, Germany) (like "aa"), remove half of them (leaving, say, "a").