Agreed, there is no objectively perfect way of measuring this stuff. My point mainly is that the author of the article picked one data point, took it out for context and built an entire lie on that. It’s very much a “look at this snow - so much for global warming” argument. But also, we keep hearing how much Windows is tanking and yet all the metrics we have show it’s actually doing well. Do people like it? No, I don’t think they do. Do I personally want to see Windows crash and burn? Yes, at least in it’s current form. But for all the frustration and anecdotes it doesn’t look like it’s going anywhere, and I don’t think any decision-makers will be convinced that Windows is failing when all the available stats suggest otherwise.