I think the goal is to make it easy to use without sacrificing what makes it useful.

The most effective way I see this done is to make the basic feature or features every easy to pick up and use, to get people in the door and avoid those day 1 learning curve issues. But for those who want to go deep, let them go down the rabbit hole.

Obsidian and Apple Notes both do this pretty well. At their core, a user can open them up and start writing and creating new notes within a a minute of first use. However, both have a lot more functionality buried under the hood for those who want to do more, so people don’t feel limited by the apparent simplicity. VS Code would fall into this bucket as well.

Compare this Notepad from Windows XP or orgmode. With Notepad, you can open it and write, but that’s it. If the user wants anything more, sorry, to find something else. Orgmode has the opposite problem of a high learning curve, step one, learn emacs… you just almost everyone outside of HN.

With a simple app, it’s easy to quickly see that it can’t fit your needs. With a complex app, maybe it takes longer, but it’s usually someone quitting over frustration, or not being able to get past the learning curve just to handle the basics.

All about mental models, and cognitive biases.

"Understanding the logic behind these biases allows us to confront, moderate, and potentially use them positively. This directory takes a swift dive into various cognitive biases affecting our lives and work, aiming to help us design with greater awareness."

https://1984.design/psychology-of-design/

They hate but still use it. Is a more accurate statement.

Often because of lack of better alternatives or out of inertia.

Majority of UX of software products we use every day range from awful (ad platforms for example) to mediocre (WhatsApp). But we don’t know any better.

> complex

I think the word you need is complicated.