Microsoft employ over 100,000 engineers. I'd advise against assuming that everything produced by any of them is bad because of bugs in Windows.

The criticism was directed at the company's product, not the employees...

If true, what difference would this make to the end user stuck with Windows

A dissatisfied Windows end user might reason this only makes the company look more pathetic

As if "100,000 engineers" is not enough to fix or replace Windows

Possibly these "100,000 engineers" do a wide variety of tasks, including producing high quality software, but to the outside observer producing better Windows software is not amongst them

Perhaps these "100,000 engineers" love working for Microsoft and they think Windows is good enough

As such, a dissatisfied Windows user such as the parent commenter might have no reason to care that these "100,000 engineers" exist, what they produce or the allleged quality of their work product

The perspective of (a) someone promoting "AI" alongside Microsoft, (b) a satisfied Windows user, (c) a Windows developer, (d) etc., might be different. Depending on their situation, different people may have different opinions

Moreover, the issue being addressed by this "library OS"^1 and by the parent commenter is _trust_, which of course is broader than product quality ("good vs bad")

Microsoft, its leadership, has violated the trust of so many people for so long, going back to its earliest days as a company, it is entirely reasonable to distrust Microsoft no matter how many people collect a paycheck from the company, what any of those people do or whether what they do is "good" or "bad"

1. The Reddit commenter seems to suggest publishing this source code may be a preemptive measure aimed at Azure "Confidential Computing" customers who have been alarmed by recent events

https://www.forbes.com/sites/thomasbrewster/2026/01/22/micro...

This is also still small/unimportant enough not to be poisoned by their broken corporate culture.