There would be a significant difference in tools. The shape of most tools is a blend between the use and the user.
Our tools are designed to take advantage of our musculature. A trunk is more spinelike, so it demands forces be transmitted directly down the spine or risk losing tensegrity. For a human spine, losing tensegrity costs you about half of your spinal strength, so without a particular trunk musculature to target, I'm going to assume the same.
A hammer for a trunk-like arm would probably look more like a kettlebell. For our arm structure, the extra length of the handle is important for generating power. For the way a trunk generates power, that extra length would be clumsy. Try putting a cardboard tube over your wrist, and see how clumsy it feels when you lose one joint. A handle would feel like a trunk with 4-5 missing joints.
They would likely have use for a whiplike tool, because it would be natural for them to use it. This would make their culture particularly good at delivering larges amounts of power into very small areas, like the tip of a whip cracking.
A trunk is particularly good at damping shocks because it has so many joints with which to disspate them. Consider that our spine has an S-curve to withstand the forces of us walking or jumping up and down. They would definitely take advantage of that, thought I cannot think of how they would at this time.
At higher levels of tech, the shape of the tool would be less based on the shape of the hand/trunk, and more based on the shape of the mind behind the tool. High end tools would tend to resemble trunks, just because their minds would be particularly good at making sense of them. You would definitely see more high-tech tools that offer very fine grained control (like a trunk or a spine) rather than tools that offer coarse control (like an arm, or a backhoe).