626
Microsoft 365 Copilot adoption is under 4.5% after 3 years, only 1% use it weekly, yet prices went up (www.windowslatest.com)
submitted 4 months ago by to c/technology@lemmy.world
85 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

Fewer than 4.5% of Microsoft 365 customers pay for Copilot after three years, only 1% use it weekly, and Microsoft raised prices regardless.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 3 points 4 months ago (4 children)

I really wanted to make copilot work. Spent hours and hours hoping I was the problem and I could prompt it well enough to provide something useful in return. At this point I'd rather have the old Microsoft Paperclip help me.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 6 points 4 months ago (3 children)

    It is good at taking technical text, and generating "executive" speech. My role is in the line between developer and executive and it's quite good at dumbing it down translating the technical bits. Fills it full of fluff that the LinkedIn lunatics My bosses love

    But I am literally graded on my token usage on my reviews so shrug

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
  • [–] 4 points 4 months ago (2 children)

    It's just marginal at most anything it does. I use it to monitor my inbox and chats. It misses stuff all the time. I've actually had to use claude to create very specific prompts for Copilot agents. It helped a lot, but overall, it's just not very good.

    I tried to get my company to buy my security team Anthropic tools, but they all fought me on it. My boss, my employees, everyone.

    I told them that while we're here trying to make Copilot help us work through things, the bad guys are out there using anything they can get their hands on. In response, my boss said that we should focus on patching and not spend time concerning ourselves with what bad actors are doing to leverage AI.

    I never understand the current anti-AI view for a lot of people. When regular people use it to try and help them do their jobs, they turn out slop, when adversaries use it to successfully and rapidly mount cyber attacks, all of a sudden it is scary effective? Which is it, because it can't be both. Either AI is shit and makes slop or it is effective in the hands of people that learn how to use it.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 3 points 4 months ago*

    I think that the people you will find who like AI and have used it know it's great at some things.

    But it's being jammed into everything and they're using it to run our water, our aquifers dry, to set the literal Earth on fire. On principle alone - I am very conflicted on it.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 1 point 4 months ago*

    When regular people use it to try and help them do their jobs, they turn out slop, when adversaries use it to successfully and rapidly mount cyber attacks, all of a sudden it is scary effective? Which is it, because it can't be both.

    Of course it can be both. Why couldn’t it be both?

    Every generative technology from the paint brush to the compiler can create trash or something impressive.

    Not everything AI makes is slop, but it sure is good at generating slop.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent