The problem is that they haven't unified decades of settings. They further fragmented the settings and made everything much worse. There are still many things you simply cannot do with the new settings app. Now there's several different places (control panel, settings app, policy editor, etc) you need to look to get any configuration changes done - and the next Windows update will probably revert your changes anyway! It's pretty user-hostile at this point.

Most of the settings reverts ars bugs not caught by Insiders. A volunteer test force is always going to be biased by the types of people willing to participate.

Personally, since a major Windows update or two ago I only have one settings panel I actively use that is still a Win32 dialog and not directly in the modern Settings app. That's the Environment Variables dialog, and being a developer/power user control panel I can see how that would be a lower priority to merge to the new Settings. Though it is still interesting to point out that the Environment Variables dialog was improved in Windows 10 over its Windows 7 counterpart.

It shouldn't be surprising to anyone at this point that Microsoft is prioritizing settings updates and merging settings dialogs into the modern app in priority order based on available telemetry of what's most commonly used. It never surprises me that most of the people still complaining that their pet settings that they care about haven't migrated to the modern Settings apps are the same that disable telemetry and complain about it. Microsoft doesn't know you are using that setting often if you aren't giving them the telemetry to understand that, it's pretty simple.

> Most of the settings reverts ars bugs not caught by Insiders

This is simply not true. Nowadays I have a freaking ps script to run after each upgrade, to set things back how I configured them.

> Personally, since a major Windows update or two ago I only have one settings panel I actively use that is still a Win32 dialog and not directly in the modern Settings app.

So you never had to use the Network Adapters window? I need that one pretty often, the new one in Settings is not adequate. How do you add or remove features from Windows, like HyperV or WSL? That one is also inside the old Add/Remove Programs applet (the features on demand in Settings app is a different mechanism, with different content and applications. Yay for consistency).

Average users don't really use those settings. Connecting to WiFi is handled by the new ui and that's what most users use. I'd say part of having so much telemetry actually helps in this respect for Microsoft to know what's used and what's not. Also for additional features even in the power user case is probably used once after a fresh install.

> This is simply not true. Nowadays I have a freaking ps script to run after each upgrade, to set things back how I configured them.

It is true: Microsoft has said several times in Insider blog posts that most settings reverts during updates are considered to be bugs, and if you find one the best place to file that bug report is Feedback Hub. If you care to see that corrected, I can only recommend you try searching Feedback Hub for your specific issues and filing them if you can't find existing reports.

> So you never had to use the Network Adapters window? I need that one pretty often, the new one in Settings is not adequate.

Can't say that I have a regular need for that, no. Most of my devices have only a single network adapter in active use at any given time and the modern Settings has been adequate for my needs.

> How do you add or remove features from Windows, like HyperV or WSL?

The last time I activated or deactivated either of those it was directly in PowerShell.

I think that’s largely valid criticism. I would say the fundamental problem of settings control fragmentation is the fundamental challenge at the heat of the windows project - it’s trying to be all things to all people. for example, the three examples you gave are each intended for different audiences (power users, non-power users, and the enterprise respectively).

I think my ideal would be for the new settings paradigm developed completely parallel to the classical settings interfaces. I don’t think it’s a good idea to deprecate classic settings, maybe not forever but absolutely not before you have parity.

I would prefer them to try and tackle whole host of issues before unified settings. Transition to a CoW fs (rip refs), separating configuration and state from the registry and more robust display scaling for starters. That said, I think settings fragmentation as-is is needlessly complex. And there have been real improvements in my opinion in some of the new settings ui/ux, for example the new per-application audio I/O control menu. The classic network properties and settings are truly awful, something as simple setting a static IP requires a series of dependant and uncloseable property panes that can’t be used (or even visible in some cases) while you are using a child of the previous pane. It’s been largely unchanged since windows 95, and in the past couple years I’ve liked where they are headed. I think that if they really can achieve their goal of a central, monolithic settings control interface then that would be a real value.

It's not as bad as described, in my experience any missing panels in the new settings have links to the old panels within the same contextual window.

> I would argue that the telemetry, updates and theming are not major concerns for Windows customers

This assertion is based on a false premise. It can be a concern, but people don't know how to address it, or are ridiculed for caring about something that is not readily provable (except in retrospect, if that).