Leroy Tennison wrote: > From: CentOS <centos-bounces at centos.org> on behalf of mark > <m.roth at 5-cent.us> > Sent: Friday, October 12, 2018 10:11 AM > Valeri Galtsev wrote: > >> On 10/12/18 8:40 AM, Leroy Tennison wrote: >> >>> And I thought it was a Kubuntu (Ubuntu with KDE desktop for those who >>> aren't familiar) thing! Apparently it's a KDE thing. I haven't >>> experienced the scrollbar aspect (or maybe I just haven't done what >>> you do) but my arrows are missing too. I'm thinking this is a KDE >>> Blasted >>> Ugly Gotcha (BUG). BTW, if you haven't already discovered it, if you >>> position your cursor where the arrows used to be the "arrow >>> functionality" still exists (if you can get the cursor position just >>> right). KDE now has invisible features... >> > <Rant tag added here> > >> In the past as programmers we were taught more wisdom than today's >> "coders" have been: One of the rules of thumb was: >> >> Don't make any changes in [debugged] program unless they are absolutely >> necessary. >> >> On a similar note: who remembers netscape navigator (web browser)? It >> was pleasantly not changing its appearance and UI (User Interface) for >> ages. These days Firefox and thunderbird are being rushed with new >> releases. "Releases" full of security holes (take a look at CentOS >> update history: firefox security updates are the most often ones). As if >> they are aiming to beat everybody in version number (currently major >> version in 50th-60th). But they can not beat Microsoft who has a >> release: >> Windows 2000. >> >> > <mark's rant added into Veleri's> > Oh, and they had to jump 40 numbers, to keep up with Google/Chrome, > because.... > > Right, like WinCrap, *have* to change the user interface, because... oh, > that's right, they can sell more training. And the new UIs aren't as > thought out, or TRIED OUT WITH END USERS as the old one was. and they > don't care about some bugs... like t-bird "oh, you *can't* not want your > email when you hit <reply all> in the list, saving to your sent folder > isn't enough copies.... >> >> </rant> >> [no beginning of rant tag, as I'm not certain where to put it] > >> Right, like WinCrap, *have* to change the user interface, because... >> oh, that's right, they can sell more training. > > And I thought it was to give the appearance of "new and improved" when > very little had really changed. (No rant here, just a statement of fact > :-) :-) :-) ... ) Maybe we should creat a neologism for this: not improved, but "deproved", possibly as an abbreviation for "disapproved of", or "deprecated". mark