3 ms·

I don't see the comparison holding water. The difference is between a tool that servers a purpose and reading or watching something is that sometimes I just nee

I don't see the comparison holding water. The difference is between a tool that servers a purpose and reading or watching something is that sometimes I just need the tool to get out of my way. The added depth available takes up time and mental resources to learn, potentially far in excess of how regularly I use the tool or how critically I need that functionality. This is especially true where there's a selection of tools that all work within a similar "market" space for X functionality - some are going to be less complex, some more intuitive for me personally, some fulfill a one-off need and their other functionality is duplicated by another system I know much better (and have put the time into learning). That shouldn't take away from your enjoyment of reading through minutiae of various systems, but you can't reasonably expect a lot of people to match your enthusiasm for doing so.

retrocryptid 4y ago
Meh. My tools aren't written for other people. They can do whatever they want. But bitching about how a tool they didn't pay for that was originally written for a different purpose requires them to read something is kind of funny. It's entirely possible there's a community of people out there who don't mind reading about abstractions exported by tools. Especially if it means you'll save time in the long run. The original post seemed to me to be a mild introduction to the concept that maybe you can get your job done more efficiently with extensible / combinable simple tools rather than waiting for someone to add a feature to Gnome. It's totally fine if you don't want to do that. If the person in the cube next to you does that, how is this an insult to you? Maybe you're not the audience for this article.