Settings

[Peter Flynn]

On 29/09/18 20:49, Ralf Mardorf wrote:
> On Sat, 29 Sep 2018 11:59:50 -0700, Bob wrote:
>> It appears the the Linux developers are following MS and ignoring
>> the users needs.
> 
> My guess is, that a company selling an operating system needs to take
> care about the majority of users, who pay for the operating system.

Except that they don't, not directly. Microsoft users' copy of the OS is
paid for by their employer (if at work) or bundled into the cot of the
PC (for domestic use). Very few MS users actually realise this (most
probably assume it's free) but the cost is hidden. If they had to pay MS
separately and directly for their OS, I think things would be very
different.

> It's hard to believe that MS doesn't care about the majority of their
> users. 

On the contrary, it's rather easy. MS are beholden first to their
stockholders, not to their users. If a setting gets broken in an update
(assuming it is not catastrophic, and easily fixed), MS may add it to
the (long) list of trivial changes to make, but MS Marketing decide
whether it gets fixed or not. Microsoft as a corporate entity is really
not interested in the details of individual users' configurations.

> Perhaps you are mistaken regarding MS. However, you are at least
> partial mistaken regarding Linux.

IMNSHE Linux developers care a *lot* about their users, and try hard to
make things work. But synchronisation of settings across so many
packages is hard, and needs reports from users to bring errors to the
attention of the people who can fix code.

Where Linux *does* break down is in the user interface; the behaviour of
individual items in the interface is handled by whatever library is
used, but the detail of what items are *called* (labelled) is largely up
to the individual developer. There are occasional serious mistakes: the
switch in scrollbar management to left-click = jump-to-location instead
of scroll-one-pane-full was ill-considered and largely unnecessary,
especially as it is not reflected in either Windows or Mac interfaces.
Fortunately, gross errors like that one are rare.

> Maybe you should test Ubuntu Mate.

I don't think the OP was looking for suggestions for an alternative. I
think he just wanted to find out why an update needed to destroy both
the monitor settings *and* the location of the settings icon in the
menus. This does seem unnecessary and unexpected, and should probably be
fixed or explained.

///Peter