[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. :)