Bringing it back to the points made by @mhotchin, I am in complete agreement. I think this speaks cogently to the functionality of CM and a person using the software would expect to be able to set a range of preferences to suit individual workflows. The Carbide software was provided FOC (and to that extent may well have been hobbled by reasons of time investment) and that free provision makes it seem churlish to complain.
Given that the Shapeoko functions depend on software, and the future software plan for Carbide’s offerings is to charge for its facilities, then it may be worth @robgrz and @Jorge looking at how to make CC and CM a good fit for more of the user base. In this task they have the expert services of @WillAdams and @Julien who are on these pages constantly supporting people new to Shapeoko and Carbide to use the software and their machines effectively.
I have used some of the Pro features of the software in this freebie year and I will continue to support the development of CC and CM when my freebie year is up. I suppose that there is never a good time in any business to change things up, given the resources it uses to initiate change. My suggestion from the sidelines is that rather than an occasional (but very welcome) thread asking for features to be incorporated, that a permanent thread be started that lists the roadmap for planned change and gathers use case information from the users.
Is this different to what takes place now? I think it may well be. Would I pay several hundred dollars for what CC is now? Probably not and maybe as I gain experience in CNC work, I would find that buying a Windows based machine and running some other software will work better for me. CM could easily be replaced by other software too.
Carbide has to decide whether they are providing a free to use get you going piece of software or a competitive software product that is worth paying for and facilitates Shapeoko use, because it is written by the hardware supplier.