[natex]

> The criticism should instead be directed towards Microsoft,

Totally agree that MS deserves criticism as you correctly point out. However, criticism towards the script and similar is equally valid (and important).

[emsy]

Yes you’re right of course, I should’ve phrased it differently. I didn’t see any criticism geared towards MS, so it kind of felt like shooting the messenger.

[pessimizer]

Specific criticism is very important and would lead to improvements in the script. However, all I'm seeing so far is general nay-saying.

[haswell]

So far, most of the criticism I've seen has been specific, and examples been provided that explain why the specific settings are problematic.

[vetinari]

> examples been provided that explain why the specific settings are problematic.

I've seen some opinions, but none could be objectively evaluated as really pointing out problematic settings. They were more in the area of subjective preferences.

[haswell]

> They were more in the area of subjective preferences

But this is exactly the point behind the criticism. The script is presented as “run this to make Windows better/safer”. If you did that without evaluating and understanding these subjective preferences, you might end up in a worse state than you started in, because maybe some of those preferences don’t really match your needs.