This is where the Microsoft leadership narrative deeply concerns me. Satya Nadella shared concerns about AI potentially losing its “social permission” if it doesn’t deliver broad societal value while we rapidly spend energy resources. The concern is valid but it entirely sidesteps where trust is actually eroding today.
The risk to AI adoption isn’t hypothetical future bubbles or abstract social benefit metrics. It’s the current, lived experience of users inside Microsoft’s own ecosystem. Trust isn’t lost in Davos panels. It’s lost when daily workflows become harder, less predictable, and less controllable to support making AI more visible, more central…. and let’s just say it: more monetizable.
From a user experience lens, this creates a quiet but dangerous disconnect:
-We’re talking about AI legitimacy at a societal level while ignoring legitimacy at the product level.
-We’re framing AI as a moral and economic imperative, while users are just trying to complete basic tasks without friction.
-We’re warning about AI excess, yet redesigning stable, well-understood tools around AI when users didn’t ask for it, or measurably need it to complete their most common user needs.
Enterprise trust doesn’t erode because users are anti-AI. It erodes when foundational expectations are broken. Consistency has disappeared. Configurability is shrinking. Experienced users, the very ones who scale and champion these platforms, now feel like second-class citizens to defaults they didn’t ask for.
If Microsoft is genuinely concerned about AI’s long-term acceptance, the answer is product restraint. It is time they acknowledge that you can’t ask users to trust “intelligent systems” while quietly destabilizing the very systems users already trusted.
Users don’t need another warning about AI hype cycles. We need our tools to work the way we expect them to (and have) with AI supporting that experience. Stop redefining it without consent.
I am still watching and still very concerned.