I get it, there's usually another metric that's at fault. Increasing Edge browser use by underhanded techniques on every install is easier than convincing users to install it. Boosting MSN hits by having a hundred million computers constantly downloading content is easier than making content people share. But the net result is going to be more of us opting out. It's a real Yahoo approach.

> Isn't that supposed to be a positive mark?

As long as it is positive to the person who writes your cheques, does it matter?

Six to twelve months after you've left, that 'feature' is unceremoniously killed, like so many of these little features in Windows has over the years, such as Active Desktop -- who didn't want a <blink><marquee> webpage embedded as their desktop?

It's not "he ruined the product", it's "he shipped what leadership wanted". And yes, it gets rewarded all the time. Besides, 'good' is a matter of perspective... if this reduced app closes by even 1% there are lots of people who see that as successful.

But this person gets to give a presentation to leadership about the reasons users disable OneDrive and propose am ambitious plan to improve it. Users filling up their OneDrive means more money while probably not only a tiny minority will move away from Windows because of stuff like this. The cost of moving to a new OS you aren't used to is huge for most users.

The next guy that reverts the feature gets the promotion. And so the wheel turns.