For me, it isn't enough to lower the number of clicks. Moving something I use all the time to behind three additional clicks, because the average user never sees it, is just stupid. Changing the name of the computer from "Computer" to "My Computer" to "The Computer" is change, for what reason? Changing things just to be different hurts everyone.
Just because you don't like it doesn't mean it was done "just to be different".
Another is something like: "we tested A B and C and in general people using B did thing better/faster/easier".
Welcome to modern design. Save new users 1 click, betray existing userbase by creating a cumulative thousand misclicks per user.
Who said anything about new users vs existing users?
Justify the change.
When talking about GUIs, it often is justified. Sometimes with metrics like number of clicks, or click targets. Another is something like: "we tested A B and C and in general people using B did thing better/faster/easier". Unfortunately that leaves people who preferred A and C, or people with baby duck syndrome, to act like change is always done for the sake of change and no one ever listens to them.
Erosion of choice is bad for lots of reasons. If they want to produce a 'Windows Idiot edition' where it is clear that these kinds of options are immutable then I'm ok with that.
They did, and it's called Windows 10 Home
No, what we need to combat with software bugs is make bugs more expensive - so it is economical to to write properly working software in the first place. How about this: once a bug is discovered, for every affected computer, Microsoft gets to pay a $100 fine.
Yes, lets punish Microsoft for not making bug-free software! Software shouldn't have any bugs, just look at.... uh.. hold on... I'll find some software that never had bugs.....gimme a moment...
Also, how come Linux has less of the "OMG super critical" bugs, like Heartbleed?
Given its much much smaller marketshare for home desktops/laptops, no one bothers to find bugs because there would be less people to take advantage of.
Why should there be a debate?
Because my preferences are fact, and anyone who feels differently is stupid.
Is it even possible to break Microsoft's stranglehold all these years after the illegal monopoly ruling?
The Monopoly ruling was about Windows, not Office. It also more specifically had to do with bundling Internet Explorer and punishing OEMs who bundled Netscape.
It is easier to write an incorrect program than understand a correct one.
