As we all are aware, changing software tools, and even more importantly, changes TO software tools are not always improvements. When I began using software 53 years ago, software was simple, straight forward, and pretty much had a single purpose. I began in the Apple arena, then IBM, DEC/VAX, Burroughs/Unysis, and settled in the Windows world. Operating systems were focused on just that, being the 'traffic director'. We didn't expect the OS to rule the world. It didn't tell us where and how to store our data, didn't tell us how to design things. Computers and software were the tools, not the architect.
Over the decades the world of software has changed focus from being a tool that those with skills could use to a do-it-all, sell-to-the-masses 'no-brainer' thing that thinks it knows more than I do.
The article mentions features such as "Documents", "Pictures", "Music", etc. The OS wants to decide where I should keep various items based on this arbitrary determination.
To me, this is akin to SQL Server deciding that this data element is varchar so it belongs in THIS table, and this element is integer to it should be stored in THIS OTHER table.
I remember the days when installing an application, the application designer decided the install location, directory names, and ASSUMMED that all the pieces of the package AND THE DATA belonged in THAT location because they 'owned' it. Of course, backups were not all that important because the actual amount of data stored on the system was minimal, and they were accomplished by copying an entire floppy disk to ANOTHER floppy disk.
With that background, I still want that sort of control over my system. I don't want all the additional features ('crap') that come with many of the installs. I don't want the OS provider to decide which tools I should use or to install all those things I will never use. My main system is probably by most standards pretty pristine. I don't often download things just to see what they are like, and if I do it is often on a separate system away from what I use daily. And I have third-party, usually very well and simply done, and often free, tools that are better than most of the freebies and that I can choose for myself and keep or throw way without unknown consequences.
As I look at my system disk, the first seven items listed in Explorer are things that I have never used and don't need but are all listed BEFORE I get to the directory structure that I have built and use, these things are usually difficult to get rid of, and the ramifications of doing so are usually unknown.
I don't need or want 'Program Files', Program Files (x86), or Program Data. And what is all that mixture of unknowns in ProgramData? (Should I be backing up that stuff just in case?) I don't want everything I download listed under something called 'Downloads' and categorized such as 'A long time ago'.
Even with Outlook, for which I have JUST upgraded to a five-year-old version, the application is now putting certain emails in a folder called 'Important'. Why does it think it needs to decide this? And why does it INSIST on 'syncing' things to GMAIL? When I connect, I don't WANT' my stuff left on someone else's server - EVER.
I want to be able to quickly and easily be able to back up my personal DATA frequently without needing to include all of the software pieces that I can easily reinstall and patch from my directory called 'INSTALLS', (as distinguished from 'DOWNLOADS') or my CD/DVD storage.
OK, so there is my rant for the day. Yeah, as the coping tip today says, 'Take three calming breaths...'.
At this point I thoroughly agree with the old thing from my IBM days that advised using the KISS method - Keep It Simple, Stupid.
One of the best days of my IT career was the day I told my boss if the problem was so simple he should go fix it himself.