Bill,
My feelings exactly. I've driven older, all-mechanical cars and my stereo is very basic. I love tools that are designed for one purpose only, and designed to do that simple thing in the most basic way. Such a tool doesn't get in the way, on the contrary, it is noticable only in its humbleness. However, I don't think that's the way most people work.
I'm a computer scientist and in the past, I've programmed quite a bit. Never got the hang of C++ or Java, let alone any decent GUI programming, because all that is very confusing to me. My last programming project was in assembler. So I was programming the machine just like people were doing it in the '60's, and at last I had control over everything. Hell, I debugged a compiler and a few pieces of hardware that way. Unfortunately, though, people seem to feel they need something fancy to show off with. Understanding the way things work is hard, so let's just get a tool that whizzbangs everything into something remotely resembling what was requested. That's the starting point of tool proliferation: tools are admired for everything they take out of your hands, instead of for everything they put into your hands.
I've seen it with computer programming (which has nothing to do with the machine you're working on anymore), I've seen it in audio (lots of lights and fancy alien-design plastic ; the audio also seems alien design), I've seen it in cars (a guy once bragged to me that he drove 160km/h on an icy road because his Lexus coped with the slippery surface) and photography is no exception (I visited a place in Japan where the mountain was continually blinking because people were flash-photographing the view of the city below).
Understanding what you're working on isn't for everybody. Those who do like it, have a hard time finding a tool that is simple enough to give them the control they need in order to achieve what they're aiming for. Fortunately, we have RFF as a community for us wizards who can do things that no mere mortal can understand 🙂
Peter.