Interesting perspective and always good to hear another POV. And a POV it is (perfectly acceptable) but I’m not sure it’s a balanced argument. For example, the user research examples given are poor and in some places, it looks like the methods chosen are incorrect. If that’s you’re interpretation of user research I can only apologise to you and say you’re not getting the best version of user research, The Jobs and Ford anecdotes are often wheeled out to challenge the product vision v customer needs argument so good to see that selective bias alive and well. Again, there is more texture to that argument and if you dig, you’ll see it’s not as it appears. Apple/Ford did and do research. There, cats out of the bag. The PMs I’ve met are thoughtful folk who balance ‘tickets’ versus insights. They don’t always get it right - accept it can’t be perfect and understand the nuances and biases at play when running research. Yes products and teams need work to do and have to ship features that drive commercials. I’m respectfully wondering if you might consider that there’s more nuances to this rather blunt and binary argument than your article might suggest.