If I saw a helicopter crashed into a tree, I don't have to be a helicopter pilot to know it's not an ideal state of a helicopter and something/some people failed.

When I'm using MS Word and it takes 20 seconds to cold launch on a machine that's magnitudes faster than any computers 25 years ago where it launched near instantly, I can tell something is going wrong. When all of their software is harassing me to use AI in ways I don't want to use it, I can tell something is going wrong.

▲

s1artibartfast a day ago | parent [-]

your comment sums up the conflict.

I dont know if you noticed, but there was a shifting of the goal post from "sub-par" to something wrong/sub-optimal.

The best helicopter you can buy may in fact crash into trees sometimes.

▲

hbn a day ago | parent [-]

Microsoft's products do not occasionally fail, they're constantly going out of their way to block users from doing basic tasks through ads and dark patterns. It makes some KPI go up so some asshat product manager can get a promotion, and they never lose users because 99% of their users are hostages.

	▲	s1artibartfast 19 hours ago \| parent [-]
		I'm not saying they are great. I am pointing out the difference between absolute and relative performance. You can have a shitty product as long as you are better than the next guy. My fortune 50 company is migrating to microsoft because they dont like their current tools