Until then: use Emacs in terminal. That's the way it was meant to be used originally, and it still looks best that way ;-)
Yeah, may be you are right. I will try it.
For what it's worth, I just opened ST for comparison and it looks nearly identical, fonts render the same between them. I believe ST and Atom have some UI elements that aren't integrated into Emacs out-of-the-box like tabs and mini-maps; is this what you are referring to?
No.
> "look so nice" since that is entirely subjective
Majority of people who aren't familiar with emacs would find it ugly. You can do it now. Show it to a couple of people who don't know sublime or emacs, and ask them to compare those.
Also look at some alternative emacs like aquamacs.
So here's my question again. Which toolkit does it use, what makes it look like it is built for Windows 3.1? Does anybody know?