> Essentially, the problem is that the software is made to fit the developers needs, not the user needs. If they both have the same needs, that's great, if they don't most people are better off with a commercial solution.
The first part may be true, but the second doesn't follow. In the case of software like Windows, etc, can you say it actually fits the user's needs? I mean sure, if Windows does what you expect and Linux / macOS don't, sure, it's great. But what if it doesn't?
I really hate non-resizable control windows, what can I do about it? I also hate the pure white interface that burns my eyes. How should I go about tweaking it? The list of ways Windows annoys me is extremely long, and I don't feel like I have any say in them. The same goes for macOS, though to a lesser degree.
This software seems to be made to benefit the "developers" (MS). People have been complaining about telemetry in Win10 and MS just ignores it.
You could argue that since I'm still using my 2013 MBP and basically only use Windows when I have no choice (gaming), I'm not really a client any more of either MS or Apple.
I guess in the case of bespoke software, or even in a case where each client is big enough for a company to listen to them, then they may steer the software's direction.
But for a random consumer OS? I really don't think so. My client is a fairly big European company, and they use Windows on their employees' desktops. There are ways in which Windows annoys them, but they have exactly 0 ways of changing this (other than dropping Windows).
