> Tools should get the hell out of the way of their users.
I think this was precisely the point that Naggum was making. Basically his thesis is that emacs is hard to learn, but eventually you can do amazing things without thinking about it. A novice tool on the other hand never makes anything but the most trivial task easy, so though it doesn't get in the way of a beginner, it never gets out of the way of the expert.
You can argue about how true this is, and debate the merits of the modern crop of text editors that make better use of GUI elements, etc; but I still found the argument he makes to be compelling and worthy of consideration even if we ultimately disagree. He didn't just invoke a religious argument about the superiority of his tool of choice—he drew up a meaningful analogy to what it means to devote the time and obsession to perfecting one's art.
I think this was precisely the point that Naggum was making. Basically his thesis is that emacs is hard to learn, but eventually you can do amazing things without thinking about it. A novice tool on the other hand never makes anything but the most trivial task easy, so though it doesn't get in the way of a beginner, it never gets out of the way of the expert.
You can argue about how true this is, and debate the merits of the modern crop of text editors that make better use of GUI elements, etc; but I still found the argument he makes to be compelling and worthy of consideration even if we ultimately disagree. He didn't just invoke a religious argument about the superiority of his tool of choice—he drew up a meaningful analogy to what it means to devote the time and obsession to perfecting one's art.