Yes I am not saying it is the best. But it is better than "Full stack adaptive delivery". Can it be improved? Surely. But does it need to be complicated further? Definitely not.
You don't need a "filesystem as a service" but if you were one of the few people who did and you saw "full stack adaptive delivery" there's a big chance you're not going to read any further.
Let's say 50% of people actually read past the tagline. People like you might read a bit further and realize they don't need it anyway. People who do need it might not read further though and you'd lose that sale.
You're probably not a target audience. A "file system as a service" is a thought that would probably pop in your head if you faced the problem they're trying to solve.
I think the immediate target audience are still technical people. Business people dealing with business problems indeed don't think about stuff like this. But the tech people that solve business problems for business people - they absolutely do. And they're the ones that select tools and design architectures for the solution.
You know how E-mail scams are always riddled with typos and grammar mistakes? A theory is that this is a deliberate way to filter out the people too smart/cyncial to fall for the scam. "By sending an initial email that's obvious in its shortcomings, the scammers are isolating the most gullible targets. If you trash their email, that's fine. They don't want you, someone from whom there's virtually no chance of receiving any money. They want people who, faced with a ridiculous email, still don't recognize its illegitimacy." [1]
When you say your service offers a cloud-based solution for delivering orchestrated micro-services powered by AI and ML, you're not targeting technical people who know this is bullshit. You're not even after business people with a real problem to solve. You're trying to isolate out-of-their-element execs with more budget than brains, who are impressed by jargon they don't understand, and who have a KPI to "undertake synergistic partnerships with hip technical solutions providers."
I think the more likely scenario is that they’re filled with typos to avoid spam detection filters for keywords and phrases. The gullibility theory doesn’t explain the advantage of using similarly appearing letters (the number one for the lowercase L), etc., which spam uses all the time.
Yeah, it's still too generic to tell you exactly what happens - but it's a starting point. It either piques your interest or lets you filter out early. It's a major improvement over "full-stack adaptive delivery".