I agree that there is a division between who loves that book (like the author) and the majority of the graduate students who had nightmares (and sometimes still gets). I like this goodreads review of the book [1]
> A soul crushing technical manual written by a sadist that has served as the right of passage for physics PhDs since the dawn of time. Every single one of my professors studied this book, and every single one of them hates it with a passion. While I've no intention of becoming a professor, I still wonder, will my colleagues also inflict this torture on their students? Will the cycle be perpetuated ad infinitum? How many more aspiring physicists will we leave battered and bruised at the gates of insanity before switching to a textbook that seeks to make electrodynamics clear and intuitive rather than a mind-numbing trip through the seventh circle of hell?
[1] https://www.goodreads.com/review/show/1266180525
* personal note: If this book is really the bible of classical mechanics, then I'm atheist.
> Now, a few years after writing that review, I must return to say that as much as I hate this book, it's probably the best textbook that I have. I constantly return to it to reteach myself basic concepts or math. The problem with the text is that in order for it to be useful, you pretty much have to already understand the material. It's a dense, technical manual that, when paired with an easier to understand text such as Griffiths, grants tremendous power. Don't get me wrong, if there is a hell, I personally hope John David Jackson is burning in it right now, but I also have to tip my hat to him
[1] https://raymii.org/s/blog/OpenVMS_9.2_for_x86_Getting_Starte...
Maybe I was just looking at the wrong job listings, but the technical difficulty (relatively low-level programming, manual memory management, dealing with janky firmware, antiquated toolchains, and incomplete documentation) seemed much harder than the compensation being offered.
At least in comparison to other types of coding you could be paid to do.
The only answer I could come up with was that unit profit margin * sales volume imposed a much lower cap, relative to pure software products?
In other driving rule systems, it's important that everyone can predict everyone else's proper behavior.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=711T2simRyI
(I know this is not the only presentation in the existence but it's one that I found; there's one by the author of Plover within some longer presentation about it.)
Honestly, doesn't seem super fast to me :-).