We all start out with the same equipment; the only automation we get is muscle memory. We add software, and multiply that. If we add automation to the software, we multiply it again.
There are reasons why some people can do more than other people. Some people have natural advantages, in certain directions. Nobody has them in all directions, but automation can often compensate in the other directions.
If you don't have ambition to excel, you can stay with the minimum. If you have enough natural talent, you can play to your strengths and excel only there. It's a choice of where to invest your time and effort. It should be a conscious choice.
IDEs are a trap because they automate only certain things the IDE author thought was important, and do not reward impulses to improve in other directions.
>There are reasons why some people can do more than other people.
Yes. 80% (or more) of that is them perfecting their technique (whatever this means in each case). 15% is them spending time on what is really matters. And 5% is for the rest, including crafting or customising their tools. And in many cases you don't really need these 5%.
>IDEs are a trap because they automate only certain things the IDE author thought was important
No, human mind is a trap. IDE is just another piece of software that can be extended just as much as vim or emacs and tailored to your needs. Maybe not that easily or extensively but still.
>things the IDE author thought was important
Modern IDE's are crafted by great number of people with constant communication with their customers and industry. Obviously mass product can't be tailored for each person but you can safely say that a generalised IDE will have all things that are actually important. Everything else can be added via plugins
PS: I'm writing this as a neovim user by the way. Still think that IDEA and VSCode are the best pieces of dev software aimed for mass market out there.
There are reasons why some people can do more than other people. Some people have natural advantages, in certain directions. Nobody has them in all directions, but automation can often compensate in the other directions.
If you don't have ambition to excel, you can stay with the minimum. If you have enough natural talent, you can play to your strengths and excel only there. It's a choice of where to invest your time and effort. It should be a conscious choice.
IDEs are a trap because they automate only certain things the IDE author thought was important, and do not reward impulses to improve in other directions.