Interesting topic.
I will start by indicating I am one of the people that state "how horrible it is." I will further my position by indicating I am a Usability Engineer. Every day I work to make software more user friendly. That is my job. Believe me or not, I am very good at it and usually know what I am talking about.
I will start by addressing the OP in detail:
I am wondering and asking whether there are other people who actually like the user interface the way it is right now (with maybe only slight improvements like Escape vs. Space vs. F9)
Right off the bat it seems you have a misunderstanding of what the 'user interface' is.
Keyboard shortcuts are completely irrelevant to the UI. They
are related to the user experience, but not the UI.
This strikes me as kind of odd as I find the interface very efficient and very clean and helpful most of the time.
This is a purely subjective opinion. I will refer back to this statement momentarily.
1. No clicking on the wrong pixel: There is no danger of being just one pixel off when clicking with the mouse. You can easily mark what you want to mark.
This is not a UI issue. This is a mouse vs keystroke issue, or more precisely an accessibility issue. Software can accommodate both mouse and keyboard control, and more often than not, does. Take Notepad, for example: Suppose I want to 'save' my document. I can mouse over the 'File' menu, click, then mouse down to 'save' and click. OR I can use the keyboard and press 'Alt-F' (or just alt then down), press the 'down arrow' two times, then press the 'Enter' key. Using the former method, I may mis-click on the wrong pixel and accidentally activate 'Open'. But while using the keyboard 'there is no danger of being just one pixel off...'
There is even a third option, I can press "Ctrl-S" and save in one simple action. Each method is deliberately designed. The Ctrl-S shortcut is the 'easiest' and 'most efficient' but not friendly to beginners who may not be aware of the shortcut. Most computer users are unfamiliar with even the most basic standard keyboard commands. One solution to get around that issue is to put the keyboard commands on the interface. Notepad actually does this within the file menu (it displays Ctrl-S as the save shortcut) BUT it does not do so on the main interface. It does NOT display "File: Alt-f | Edit: Alt-e | Format: Alt-o" etc. The reason: clutter. It removes from the 'very efficient and very clean' interface. In fact, most software products don't even display the accelerator key anymore (the underline displayed under the Alt shortcut key) until the Alt key is pressed. This is because in the end such things turn out to be clutter and misleading to *most* users. Experienced users, on the other hand, know how to make such hints appear (hold Alt, for example) and thus do not need the accelerator to be displayed at all times.
So while your initial issue with keyboard vs mouse was NOT a UI issue, it touches on UI problems- which happen to relate to your initial statement of the interface being "very efficient and very clean and helpful". Keyboard commands and shortcuts
must be prominently displayed on the interface in order to assist users in finding them since there is no other suitable alternative to execute commands. That is 'helpful' but NOT 'very efficient' or 'very clean'. The help text does not contribute to the interface or the application in anyway, its only purpose is to help you in accessing functions. While important, needing help is generally BAD because it means something was not immediately apparent or obvious and presents an initially bad user experience.
2. Fast commands: You can quickly access the commands/command menus you want as a single keypress gets you there.
Again, not a UI issue. Thats a keyboard vs mouse issue. And again I will refer to Notepad: I can quickly access commands and menus with a single keypress, but if I do not know the keystroke necessary I can still do so with a single click and am not burdened with excessive screenspace dedicated to explaining how to execute the most basic of actions.
3. Easy overview: The command info you have (the middle section of the screen in the default situation) gives you a reminder of all the keys you need to know.
This is your first (and only) actual reference to the UI. It is also very misguided...
Which is better:
1) Having all commands easily accessible in a way that you instantly know how to execute them without need for reference; or
2) Having a reference on how to execute commands instantly available so that you can easily find out how to do what you want
?
Yes, having the reference is better than not, but that is simply a bandaid for the poor accessibility to commands. Why not
fix the command access and make the reference unnecessary? All too often I find users appreciating the crutches given to them rather than deploring the fact that they are hindered in the first place.
Personally, I am very happy with the current interface and would miss it dearly if it got removed.
You are happy with the key-driven experience. Not the interface. To the best of my knowledge no one is pushing for that to be changed. I know some people may desire the specific shortcuts to be changed to a more intuitive and up-to-date layout; or perhaps remove the specific key references on the actual interface to allow for less confusing customization- but no one wants them removed.
So, are there others who feel the same, or how do you see this?
Experienced users will benefit least from any changes made to the interface. Even those that do not like the existing interface will, temporarily, suffer from any changes. But, while you may be used to the interface as it is now, and you may even 'like it', I can guarantee you that with properly thought out design changes, you
will benefit mightily in the long run from an interface update.
As a general rule, experienced users will subjectively rate software better on all counts than new users. I've also witnessed users struggle immensely with aspects of a UI only to immediately after declare "Oh yeah, I liked it a lot; I wouldn't change anything" when asked about it. The biggest point I ever try to push on our developers when they rely too much on subjective opinions is that
users lie.(EDIT: let me clarify, they do not lie to be deceitful, or even on purpose, they are lying to themselves as well; they subconsciously do not realize the
actual problems they encountered and effectively mentally block them out/edit) You can not only rely on perception or opinion as a designer, you must also incorporate
how people actually use the software in your decisions. I have plenty of clips of real customers experiencing immense trouble completing a task only to claim it went well right afterwards.