> Our tools should adapt to us, not the other way around! Agreed! I actually provided some concrete critique of Google docs in OP. Do my criticisms also apply

> Our tools should adapt to us, not the other way around! Agreed! I actually provided some concrete critique of Google docs in OP. Do my criticisms also apply to Microsoft Word and LibreOffice? More broadly, I'd like to persuade you that your software choices have unanticipated secondary consequences for you. The software world today is not a tame, urban place where you can afford to select tools based just on the features they offer. It's a jungle out there. You need to take into account the entities providing the tools, their goals and incentives. It's not a choice between hacks and no hacks, there's hacks everywhere. And hacks aren't even the most important lens to view your situation through. What matters is the intention behind the hacks. Are they working for you? The key design constraint for me lately is to depend as much as possible on software that is easy to build. Open source is necessary but not sufficient. Back in 1973 Ivan Illich had some useful things to say about the relationship between a society and its tools: http://akkartik.name/illich.pdf http://akkartik.name/illich.pdf