Depends on the relative values one places on form, content, and completeness.

In HN terms, Microsoft's website[s] is[are] great as MVP's and improvements thereupon.

On the other hand, in terms of Apple's ex cathedra philosophy, then perhaps, yes it[they] is[are] bad.

> yes it[they] is[are] bad

That was mind-breaking. My brain processed it as, "yes it they is er, what are aaaaah bad".

Well... They try to get to a new simplicity. I agree that they fail at making it great, but you´ve got to give them some love for trying.

Metro is actually innovative, yet not ideal for desktop PCs. And it´s just the same with the new Logo: Strict simplicity (which makes Apple great), but not thought through in a way.

To me it feels like there´s a gatekeeper at the top missing asking the tough questions before the product is out of the door. The one that asks: "But does it really make sense and how can we do better" when the managers self-congratulate themselves on the bold moves.

I don't like it either. Design isn't one of Microsofts strengths.