[CentOS] Scroll bar arrows missing and behaviour change

[Leroy Tennison]

Leroy Tennison
Network Information/Cyber Security Specialist
E: leroy at datavoiceint.com
2220 Bush Dr
McKinney, Texas
75070
www.datavoiceint.com
TThis message has been sent on behalf
of a company that is part of the Harris Operating Group of
Constellation Software Inc. These companies are listed
here
.
If you prefer not to be contacted by Harris
Operating Group
please notify us
.
This message is intended exclusively for the
individual or entity to which it is addressed. This communication
may contain information that is proprietary, privileged or
confidential or otherwise legally exempt from disclosure. If you are
not the named addressee, you are not authorized to read, print,
retain, copy or disseminate this message or any part of it. If you
have received this message in error, please notify the sender
immediately by e-mail and delete all copies of the
message.

________________________________________
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
To: CentOS mailing list
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [CentOS] Scroll bar arrows missing and behaviour change

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]
>
> Valeri

     mark

_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS at centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

> 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 :-) :-) :-) ... )