Okay, I'll give it a shot-
I think the first, easiest answer is that analog mixers are just way nicer to use than a mouse and computer moniter. All of your settings are laid out in front of you. Even when you're not tweaking the knobs, you get a much better global view of what's going on with regard to levels, eq, pans, sends, returns, etc.
From the ADAT, you run each track back to a mixer channel. From here you have full control over just about everything and you can make use of your high quality EQ's, group buses, top-of-the-rack outboard effects. And so on. You can get really creative with patching too, if you're into that. Add this to the first point and you're into an experience that cannot be duplicated in software.
You may be right on the hangover point in the respect that analog mixing recalls the days of wiring schematics that you could follow with your index finger, actually thats exactly what it is. It is intuitive because it is more like the things we're used to. I suppose there will come a time when microchips are the standard by which we'll all understand electronics, but it seems too much like guesswork to me.
With a set-up like Ed's, you are actually doing analog mixing and using your computer as your mixdown deck. All of the mixing and processing has been done before you get to the computer. I'm sure he'll be able to explain this much more elegantly and thoroughly than I have. I've only recently graduated from the Tascam 424, so I'm going on theory more than experience. And besides, we're hogging up somebody else's thread
Now, the real issue: I need a 10 page paper on some aspect of American grammar; sort of a descriptive vs. prescriptive piece, and any pedagogical implications. Do you teach ESL/EFL? My ESL classmates have no trouble with this stuff, but for me it's pure agony. Oh, and I have to present it Tuesday night!