[tl]

I'd not sure that the thread model is that much worse than other text editors. It's just that its customizability makes the deficiency more apparent.

However, Emacs has 3 fundamental weaknesses versus modern alternatives:

1) Out of box, it doesn't do a whole lot unless you need to edit plain text or elisp. This has improved in recent years. It needs to improve a lot more.

2) Emacs is not "pretty". Specifically, even "native" ports never look quite right and there's a limit to what you can fix (it's a surprisingly high limit, but still). Since the value of the first run experience is underestimated by people who have been using emacs for years, this is not improving.

3) Emacs cannot be ported effectively to "limited" platforms that don't respect the GPL or allow downloaded code in applications cough iOS cough. This might be the final nail in its coffin in a decade or so, as more platforms take this stance for protectionist reasons (everyone wants 30% rent and malware/piracy/whatever will be cited as justification).

[seanmcdirmid]

> (everyone wants 30% rent and malware/piracy/whatever will be cited as justification).

Emacs is a platform in itself. I don't think anyone has figured out how to create sub-gardens inside walled gardens yet, and what that even means to the curated vetted app experience. Taken to an extreme, obviously, even postscript viewers and other non-trivial viewers aren't allowed either (since they have to "interpret" documents).

[taeric]

The pretty angle is interesting. I personally like the look of just having a text editor with virtually no chrome. I'm curious what it would take to get emacs "prett," and if it would be worth attempting. More, which would be more work, taking emacs and making it pretty, or extending a brand new editor to be as capable as emacs?

[aerique]

After having used Emacs for quite some time I really cannot care less how it looks. It grows on you.

However, I can understand what it must look like to new users compared to f.e. Sublime Text or Visual Studio. Emacs isn't particularly inviting compared to them.

[taeric]

Do you think a simple layer of chrome on top of emacs would suffice for most folks, though?

And, I find calling Visual Studio inviting scary. There is so much going on there that it really jars my senses. I guess if I'm wanting to "explore" with the mouse it is good. But if I'm wanting to type in something, not so much.

Of course, maybe that is really all of this call for "visual" programming really missing a boat. In that most folks that pine for this visual nirvana simply refuse to try out visual studio. :)