> Mark Pilgrim obviously doesn't get it -- he even admits he doesn't understand why one would select a no-distractions word processor.
But what he actually states is:
> I guess the part I dont understand is the target audience. Who is so serious about writing that they need a full-screen editor, but so unserious that they dont have a favorite editor already?
Anyway, what immediately rang a bell with me is the hyperbole this editor is marketed with. Mark Pilgrim quoted very similar hyperbole.
What I don't understand is that people actually believe that a full-screen editor will matter. The choice of an editor (or word processor, or whatever) seems almost irrelevant. There are just too many other, way more troublesome hurdles between "you and your text".