I agree but also feel like there is so much to improve in editor spaces but current “defaults” are just good enough. I like the keyboard example - current staggered keyboard layout is only used because we had physical typewriters that needed staggered keys because of physical constraints. But our fingers aren’t really good at going left and right, even slight movement means that you need to move your whole wrist left or right. Also keeping your wrists so close to each other is painful and not natural, definitely less comfortable than keeping them at shoulder distance. But the default is just good enough and too strong. We have split ortho keyboard but they are niche. So any revolution in editors will be stopped by the fact that too many people are comfortable enough with current default. And I’m honestly hungry for some revolution here
> And I’m honestly hungry for some revolution here
Nicely put.
Yes, I think there is room for a lot of innovation yet in many areas: OS design, programming language design, input devices, GUIs, and much more besides.
Saying that, when implemented well, there's a lot of stuff that's pretty good.
I think one aspect that's neglected is that yes, some tech we all use is very old and legacy-inspired. But often, it's not that we use some ancient thing because it's ancient and it hasn't changed. It's because it had lots of competitors but it beat them all.
For instance, QWERTY. Yes it is very old and yes it came from typewriters.
But I own 2 computers with
ABCDEF
GHIJKL
MNOPQR
STUVWX
YZ
... layouts. There are also QWERTZ and AZERTY used by millions. Dvorak failed to its inventors' deep misery. (No, not Dvořák, although Dvorak was a descendant of Dvořák.)
There have been tonnes of others tried.
The survivors are the ones that beat out the competition.
And in some instances, the competition survives and does OK in its little niche, and that is fine, too...
