>Windows settings panels have at least 2 diff ways to configure anything, the "old" and the "new". Graphics settings have 4 places to change stuff (Intel, Nvidia, built in old and new). It's just a jumbled mess.

They're well aware of that, and if you follow the insider previews, every new build is moving more of the features into the "new" way of doing things. Is it annoying there are two places? Absolutely... but the alternative is not changing anything and waiting 5 years while everything gets rolle dup.

>Bluetooth never recognizes device names (it's a guessing game as to which "Unknown Device" is the one I want). The trackpad is mediocre, and the config panel from Synaptics probably hasn't changed since Windows 95.

Not sure what to tell you there other than a buggy driver on your laptop. All of my bluetooth devices tell me exactly what they are before and after adding them.

The trackpad thing isn't Windows, it's the trackpad razer chose to use, or the driver. One of the reasons that MS finally said f-it and introduced precision touchpad. If you still have the old-school synaptics panel, then Razer chose not to participate.

> but the alternative is not changing anything and waiting 5 years while everything gets rolle dup.

Windows 7 was released 7.5 years ago, and Windows 8 was released 4.5 years ago. Whether or not they make interim releases, Microsoft clearly cannot pull off a user interface overhaul in any reasonable span of time.

You underestimate the complexity and depth of Windows. There's a TON of forms and code out there and you literally cannot just port that 15-30 year old C code to C# without taking a step back to think about the design and functionality of the new screen. There's a LOT of work that goes into each transition from ancient Win32 to a modern interface.

The complexity is mind blowing. And yet, does it need to be? Recently I started looking at how Windows Update works. It self-updates first with a reasonably complex web services API, then it has this ridiculious way of checking what is installed by looking at undocumented registry keys and even loads its own registry component hive.

It then works out via web services what needs to be updated, and uses deltas to download file chunks.

It downloads and installs the new updates into the winsxs folder, then updates hardlinks from this folder into the c:\windows\system32 directory, but does not remove the old package.

Then it installs the updates, which can be done with a cab file, mum file, msi file or some other mechanism.

To do all if this it uses WSUS, Component Based Servicing (CBS), Component Servicing Interface (CSI), Windows Side by Side (winsxs), NTFS link features, Windows Installer and probably much more besides.

And yet it is unbelievably fragile. I can't tell you how many times I've found broken packages. Microsoft have turned on CBS logging on all systems and recently I've found that hard drives have run out of space because it has taken up gigabytes of space (this is because Microsoft archives log files in CAB files, but these have 2GB limits and if the log file goes over 2 GB it can't handle this), gigabytes of dusk space is taken up with useless old updates that until very recently you couldn't remove.... the datastore.edb file is massive and can corrupt, security patches had issues because there have been so many of them and Microsoft had to make a new CAB file format, and Windows 7 and later has the most insane package dependency generating algorithm that I kid you not but it spends hours just generating it. Some of this stuff still hasn't been fixed.

Then I look at a Debian based system. I've literally never had an issue I couldn't work out how to solve in 10 minutes. It just works, and in an incredibly fast time - and I virtually never have to reboot!

I'm currently involved in a monolithic refactoring and redesign task at work converting a C# application to C# (this is partially a joke) and it's hair raising. I can't even imagine all the moving parts involved in creating a new OS that's backwards compatible with the old but still be new...

> They're well aware of that, and if you follow the insider previews, every new build is moving more of the features into the "new" way of doing things. Is it annoying there are two places? Absolutely... but the alternative is not changing anything and waiting 5 years while everything gets rolled up.

The Control Panel started transitioning to a 'browser-style' interface with Windows Vista. 10 years later, I'm still waiting for everything to be 'rolled up'.

In both cases, the old paradigm was 'fine', and a bifurcated UI made for a worse experience than either alternative.

In the current state, tons of settings are only available in one of three UIs, where all three are named identically and serve the same purpose. EG: To change the name of your computer, you might go, Settings > System > About > 'System Info' --> System [Vista] > 'change settings' --> System Properties [Win95].

I'd rather have the Windows 95 control panel workflow to this mess. If it takes 5 years, they'll take 5 years. There's no reason to make the system worse in the meantime.

Sorry to hear that, Razer is utter garbage. Not to mention they have the WORST customer support on the planet. I'd sell it mate, ASAP. Seriously, not joking. Sell it and get an XPS

XPS hardware is probably better than Razer, but its not Apple level either though.

Honestly, I just wish I had an Apple level trackpad :/

Almost all the issues you describe are not directly related with Windows though, but with OEM and third-party softwares.