> In terms of user adoption, it seems to me that Leo is nowhere near that of > other main text editors. Sure, Leo is in a category of its own, being an > outlining editor, as opposed to a simple editor, but should this not make > it more popular, instead of more obscure?
My take on this is, is that Leo is so different from prior experience, is that we just don't "get it" until hanging around and studying for awhile. It looks and behaves like a text editor at first approximation, but as a straight up text editor it's kind of lacklustre. It doesn't have the beauty and smooth user experience of Sublime, or the apparent power and flexibility of Notepad++ or vim/emacs (stress on apparent). Similarly as an IDE there's not much initial draw, the code hints and tab expansion in something like Eclipse or PyScripter seem far more advanced and extensive. Again, at initial exposure. My only experience of outlines prior to Leo was from MS Word, so that wasn't a draw. I just didn't, couldn't, appreciate what having that in a text editing environment meant, let alone clones-in-outlines. I think of this as similar to seeing perspective<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perspective_%28graphical%29>drawing in art. It's not innate. The mind needs to learn how to interpret the lines and squiggles on flat paper as 3 dimensional objects. however once learned it takes extra effort to see them as mere flatland again. Unfortunately it's a lot harder to get the "aha!" of Leo than of interpreting perspective. Or maybe it's just easier to learn it at 10 years old than at 30! cheers, -matt -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "leo-editor" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/leo-editor. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
