> XeTeX helps, but in my last team, I was stuck with Latex Yep, I agree that font-related things are painful if you can only use LaTeX. > For tables there are

> XeTeX helps, but in my last team, I was stuck with Latex Yep, I agree that font-related things are painful if you can only use LaTeX. > For tables there are many many different implementations that all work in only some use cases [2]. A few years ago, I got stuck trying to find a multicolumn table that can reflow onto new pages [3]. If you need complicated reflowing tables, then yes, LaTeX may not be the best option. But most of the time, you don’t need that complexity: I find that just `booktabs` is sufficient for most of my use-cases, along with `array`, `multirow`, `tabularx` and `siunitx` when needed. > Add to that the clunky syntax This is a criticism I can agree with, but I find that a good editor compensates for it. (I use AUCTeX[0]; I find the combination of LaTeX+AUCTeX+Emacs+Evil gives a far better experience than, say, Microsoft Word.) > the cryptic error messages Valid point. However, as with all error messages, I find that they get easier to interpret with experience — I don’t really have any problems with them now. (Also, most compilers tend to give somewhat cryptic errors, so LaTeX is average rather than being especially bad.) > the poor defaults I’m not sure what you mean by this; could you please elaborate? [0] https://www.gnu.org/software/auctex/ https://www.gnu.org/software/auctex/