Agreed, the usability of tooling is important. Code is not just a tool to do a task, it is at once the tool and the communication to future developers.

Programmers, like anyone else passing through an educational system, self-select for strengths and avoid their weaknesses. Thinking is prized among programmers; thinking about how others think is most manifestly not prized.

There is also a demographic phenomenon. Each group rebels against something. (Parentheses, compilation time, memory management.) If the rebellion makes sense, it may result in progress. But to be well-designed, a rebellion must be consistent in its principles.

Safe code that still compiles and runs unchanged after decades is a measure of the real value of the design. Tooling that is partially or completely broken, or chasing faddish delights, is a sign of profoundly indifferent design.