One thing that you could definitely miss is the gradual creep of latency. While throughput on terminal emulators is certainly infinitely faster than 300 baud ph

One thing that you could definitely miss is the gradual creep of latency. While throughput on terminal emulators is certainly infinitely faster than 300 baud physical terminals, latency has suffered a bit over time: buffering (sometimes to improve throughput) has added a frame here and some milliseconds there. Granted, I have Never used a physical terminal, but I believe some of them had enough circuity to locally update the cursor during line editing and whatnot, and if that was the case, in theory they should have excellent latency characteristics. On one hand, these latency figures are so small that they're usually difficult to directly perceive; who can even notice the difference between e.g. 25ms and 30ms of latency? That aside though, I believe it likely still negatively impacts the experience. Personally, it feels extremely pleasing to use a pre-compositing desktop environment on a CRT display; the lack of latency is visceral. I am so used to modern machines that it typically feels like it's updating before I have even performed the action. I think that modern terminal emulators and text editors in modern desktop environments on modern computers with modern peripherals run the risk of having latency bad enough that it actually, if only subtly, impacts typing. USB polling rates, relatively high latency 60hz panels, buffering from compositing, it all does add up over time for sure. Add SSH to the mix and it could legitimately make the difference between something feeling quite usable and something that is irritating.