Microsoft acknowledges the backlash
Microsoft's Windows chief has publicly acknowledged mounting user and developer frustration over the company's recent AI-driven direction for Windows. Pavan Davuluri, president of Windows and devices, replied on X that "the team (and I) take in a ton of feedback" and that he has "read through the comments and see focus on things like reliability, performance, ease of use and more." He also reiterated that Microsoft "cares deeply about developers" and conceded the company "has work to do on the experience," pointing to issues such as "inconsistent dialogs" and "power user experiences." Davuluri previously used the phrase "agentic OS" to describe Microsoft’s long-term vision for Windows—a description that has become a flashpoint for critics.
What people are complaining about
The reaction has been broad and vocal, drawing criticism from engineers, hobbyists, and journalists alike. Key complaints include:
- An "agentic" vision for Windows that some users see as unnecessary or intrusive, especially when it implies automated actions and deeper system-level AI integrations.
- Persistent stability and performance problems that many feel should take priority over new AI features.
- Fragmented user experience and UI inconsistencies, from dialog boxes to system settings.
- Developer-facing regressions and defaults that make the platform feel less friendly to software engineers.
- Privacy and control concerns tied to features like Recall AI, which records and indexes on-screen activity for searchability.
- Emergency patches were required after a security update reportedly broke the Windows Recovery Environment (WinRE), preventing mouse and keyboard use for some affected machines.
- An October regression in the kernel-mode HTTP server (HTTP.sys) disrupted localhost connections, interfering with web development and debugging for developers.
- File Explorer preview panes and certain peripheral drivers (for example, some Logitech devices) were reported to have stopped working after updates.
- The Recall AI feature has been delayed multiple times and sparked debate because it cannot be fully removed, only disabled according to Microsoft messaging, raising privacy concerns for some users.
- Increased migration to alternative operating systems or hardware ecosystems.
- Friction for developers who rely on consistent local tooling and debugging facilities.
- Heightened scrutiny from privacy-conscious customers and regulators as AI features collect or process more contextual signals.
Critics argue Microsoft is pushing Copilot and other AI integrations before addressing long-standing fundamentals, a sentiment summarized by one commenter who said they wanted "2015 software with 2025 security" rather than an OS that "watches everything you do." Technical commentators such as Gergely Orosz publicly voiced frustration, prompting Davuluri's response.
Faulty updates and feature rollouts have amplified the ire
Beyond philosophical objections, users cite concrete recent problems that have increased skepticism about Microsoft's priorities:
Reports that Microsoft recently ended free security updates for Windows 10 have also fed a sense of urgency and frustration among users who feel migration paths and support decisions are being mishandled.
How Microsoft is responding — tone versus specifics
Davuluri’s public reply was conciliatory in tone, stressing the company listens to both product-feedback systems and direct comments. He encouraged further private engagement with nervous developers and users. Yet several outlets and commentators described the response as underwhelming because it lacked concrete timelines, technical explanations, or an actionable roadmap addressing the core criticisms.
Supporters of the company's AI strategy point out Microsoft’s broader ambition: to make Windows more "ambient" and assistive by connecting devices, cloud, and models in ways that automate repetitive tasks and surface context-aware help. For some enterprise and productivity users, these capabilities could deliver real efficiencies.
But for many everyday and power users the practical question remains: why layer complex AI features on top of an operating system that still shows systemic bugs and inconsistent UX decisions?
Why this matters
Windows powers a huge installed base across home, business and developer environments. If users lose confidence in stability, control or developer friendliness, the consequences include:
The debate also highlights a tradeoff tech companies face today: balancing innovation (especially AI-driven features) with the steady, often invisible work of keeping an OS dependable and predictable.
What's next
Microsoft's immediate moves are likely to be incremental: bug fixes and targeted patches to address the most visible regressions, and private outreach to developer communities. Long-term, the company will need to show how its agentic OS vision maps to clear controls, privacy guarantees, and a timeline that does not leave fundamental reliability by the wayside.
For users and admins, the practical advice remains the same: stay current with security patches, monitor update notes before wide deployment, and consider staged rollouts for production machines until Microsoft publishes clearer guidance. For Microsoft, listening is only the first step; delivering measurable, timely fixes and transparent roadmaps will be necessary to restore trust.
Bottom line
Microsoft acknowledges the criticism and says it is "trying to balance" feedback from many sources. But the controversy underscores a broader tension: an industry-wide rush to add AI capabilities colliding with the day-to-day expectations of reliability, control and developer productivity. The next few months will be revealing—if Microsoft can turn conciliatory words into concrete fixes, the company may temper the backlash; if not, dissatisfaction may deepen among the very communities Windows needs most.