Lol "Microsoft can't make something work ergo the technology is not feasible".

"The technology is not useful", at least in enterprise contexts, is what this comes out to. Which is really where the money is, because some vibecoder paying $20/mo for Claude really doesn't matter (especially when it costs $100/mo to run inference for his queries in the first place). Enterprise is the only place this could possibly make money.

Think about it: MS has a giant advantage over every other AI vendor, that they can directly insert the product into the OS and LOB apps without the business needing to onboard a new vendor. This is best case scenario, and by far the easiest sell for these tools. Given how badly they're failing, yeah, turns out orgs just don't see the value in it.

Next year will be interesting too: I suspect a large portion of the meager sales they managed to make will not renew, it'll be a bloodbath.

	▲	cosmicgadget an hour ago \| parent [-]
		MS has a giant advantage over every other vendor for all kinds of products (including defunct ones). Sometimes they function well, sometimes they do not. Sometimes they make money, sometimes they do not. MS isn't the tech (or even enterprise tech) bellcow. Considering enterprise typically is characterized by perfunctory tasks, information silos, and bit rot, they're a perfect application of LLMs. It's just Microsoft kind of sucks at a lot of things.