[marcosdumay]

The problem with the Microsoft features is really not excessive ambition.

Half of the time it's open user hostility and blatant incompetence. The other half it's just the incompetence. Ambition doesn't enter the picture at all.

[etchalon]

Eh. I think it is ambition. It's a lot product managers coming up with ideas, I think, and teams with a mandate to release those ideas.

[observationist]

Yes, and those ideas are user hostile and poorly conceived, badly executed, and incompetently built.

A remote code execution exploit in notepad?! That's not professional, or skillful, or well done. Unnecessary feature bloat and change for the sake of change, because some MBA dork wants to justify their department and continued employment by checking boxes on spreadsheets.

There's no innovation or skillful, well built features. There's hardly any consideration of users at all, except as net continuing depositors of money into Microsoft coffers. Features and updates are nothing more than marketing slop and manipulation of enterprise into renewing subscriptions and purchasing the latest version of new hardware.

edit:

I just don't think that you can point at a company whose entire foundational product, Windows, the operating system that's pretty much default for most of the world, and say that they're not completely and utterly failing as a company when their single most compelling "feature" is that the OS can run Excel.

It's the year of the Linux desktop, fire it up and never look back!

[etchalon]

I agree except for Microsoft "failing". Windows is failing. Microsoft has moved onto other things.

[marcosdumay]

The two moats Microsoft has are Windows and Office. All of their revenue generating products only sell because of those two.

[etchalon]

That was true like a decade ago.

[marcosdumay]

Yes, that was true a decade ago too.

[blibble]

azure is just as bad, if not worse