[michaelmrose]

It's perfectly OK to mistake a subjective preference as objective user friendliness its most people's definition of the term. What is negative is to confuse disagreement with your preference with being unreasonable.

> People who hate on it just have some historical gripe with it, I feel like.

The way it handles virtual desktops with multiple monitors out of the box poorly thought out. With 3 monitors having changing workspaces only effect the primary monitor is very poor user experience. that leaves virtually pun intended without the affordance of virtual desktops at all.

There is a setting to expand virtual desktops to all monitors and now you no longer have to dig through something that looks like the windows registry to enable it which is indeed a nice upgrade but it misses the vastly superior third option of being able to independently switch each monitor.

An obvious affordance instead of digging through a settings menu would be a little iconic padlock beside a representation of the virtual desktop switcher that when unlocked enables you to manually switch a singular monitor or when by default locked allows the monitor to change with every other monitor.

Trivially enables not only all 3 possible workflows but allows one to discover this organically at the cost of a small amount of screen real estate.

This is a singular issue but their entire history is rife not merely with subjective differences in user preference but objectively bad design.