←back to thread

296 points mohi-kalantari | 4 comments | | HN request time: 0.001s | source
Show context
neilalexander ◴[] No.46194859[source]
I would think that if they actually spent the time and money fixing the core functionality of their core products (like Windows and Office) that they might have a much easier time promoting things like Copilot. Instead they leave their users wondering why they're so hell-bent on shoehorning AI into a Start menu that takes whole seconds longer to open than it should or into Windows Search that regularly fails to find installed programs or local files.
replies(7): >>46194925 #>>46194942 #>>46194963 #>>46195067 #>>46195157 #>>46195245 #>>46195382 #
coldpie ◴[] No.46195067[source]
Microsoft is a public company. That means their primary product is not products or services, it's their stock. Selling products & services can be an advertisement for their stock, but there are other methods of convincing people to buy their stock, too. Currently the stock market only wants stocks that have "AI" associated with them. It doesn't matter whether users like it or not, because having a viable business is not what the stock market is currently focused on. So, Microsoft is doing what they need to do to sell their primary product: shove AI into everything.
replies(5): >>46195081 #>>46195161 #>>46195214 #>>46195424 #>>46196013 #
1. watwut ◴[] No.46195161[source]
That is not what stock market is. A company does not have to focus on stock price and stock price is not its primary product.
replies(2): >>46195347 #>>46195885 #
2. coldpie ◴[] No.46195347[source]
That's fair, I should reframe. The incentive given to decision makers at Microsoft is company stock. That means the primary focus for everyone who makes decisions at Microsoft is the stock price, which in turn means the stock price is the primary product for the company itself.
3. _DeadFred_ ◴[] No.46195885[source]
Name a major U.S. public company in recent years that has consistently prioritized improving its product over boosting short term stock price or extracting maximum profits. If capitalism were truly a healthy system about building strong products to create healthy markets, this should be the norm (and enshitification shunned), not the exception.

What we actually see is a system of chartered extraction. Corporate executives are like Norman lords, granted their 'title' (CEO of instead of Earl of) by shareholders (rather than a king) in return for which both are/were expected to extract maximum value by any means necessary. Extractive tactics often at the expense of long-term product strength are behaviors shareholders expect if the CEO is to keep their bestowed 'title'.

Don't forget the progenitor joint stock company The East India Company, Capitalism in it's purest form without government restriction. Profit-maximizing, absentee extraction, with company executives serving as quasi-feudal lords over assets and people. Modern corporate capitalism is hard to distinguish, in its structure,history, behavior, and incentives, from the Norman extraction system, it's just dressed in a more politically palatable wrapper and forced to mellow out from it's desired East India Company style final form.

replies(1): >>46196235 #
4. Marsymars ◴[] No.46196235[source]
> Name a major U.S. public company in recent years that has consistently prioritized improving its product over boosting short term stock price or extracting maximum profits.

Well in some perverse sense, I'd say Meta qualifies here. Zuck isn't beholden to other shareholders and is free to burn truckloads of money on worthless projects. The big asterisk is that for Meta, "improving its product" is effectively "creating the best digital cigarettes".