I agree completely with Jeff's observation about the "fine print" rule. Unfortunately, software today is governed by the fine print, exclusions, excuses, legal technicalities, disclaimers of suitability of fitness for a particular purpose and unstated omissions. We pay a lot of money for some of the software we use and expect it to work well. When problems are found and loss occurs, the companies point to "terms and conditions". We don't want excuses; we want the software to work properly.

When companies collect information to the point where it becomes intrusive, we used to call it "stalking". Now it's called "terms and conditions". When we "buy" software, we sometimes later discover that we're really only "renting" it and have to pay more money. We used to call false product claims "fraudulent advertising" but now we call it "terms and conditions".

I agree that things need to be addressed honestly, but the "terms and conditions", excuses, legal word parsing and lack of actual support are some of the reasons why people exaggerate problems and blow things out of proportion. Microsoft and Oracle have huge and complex products. While companies definitely have to prioritize bug fixes, I feel they should also stand behind their products more, stop making excuses and write software that works.

Myself, I try to focus on making software that works and leave the politics, excuses and other garbage at the door.