On Tue, Sep 15, 2020 at 08:45:56PM +0000, Gregory Heytings wrote:
> 
> >
> >This is exactly the point I was putting in question: My take is
> >that popularity is part of a giant feedback loop [...]

> This is not clear at all IMO.  When users choose to use VS Code or
> Atom or Emacs or ..., they choose between a number of free (as in
> beer) products. In such cases [1] I tend to think that marketing plays
> little if any role, and that it's the quality of the product that
> matters.  More precisely, not the absolute quality, but the quality
> for newcomers.  As Chad wrote: "it's much easier/more intuitive to
> get started" or "it's quick/easy/obvious how to get it to 'it
> just-works'".

[1] But "such cases" are the exception. When I worked at a bigger
company, I /had/ to use (to me) horrible software. After a while,
most people got used to it and enjoyed their Stockholm syndrome.
I seem to be somewhat stubborn (which didn't make my life easier,
mind you).

[...]

> IMO, it's pointless to discuss whether Emacs should be changed, or
> how potential changes should be judged.  In fact I don't understand
> why such discussions/debates take place [...]

No, no. I think such debates are important, to help shape Emacs's
evolution.

> flexible of all available editors, and can be adapted to all
> imaginable needs.
> 
> So the only thing that should change in Emacs is that it should be
> made easier (even more: as easy as possible) to customize and
> understand for newcomers.

In this we agree.

Cheers
 - t