The Uncomfortable Truth About Microsoft Copilot

A Case From Denmark With Global Implications

Over the past few decades, the overwhelming majority of higher education institutions in Denmark, almost all of which are state funded but independently run, have cultivated a close relationship with Microsoft. On the surface, this has appeared to be a pragmatic and effective approach to their digital infrastructure, and in many ways, it is. Excel, Word, and Outlook are indispensable tools for most, and apps like Power BI, SharePoint, OneNote, and Teams have become deeply integrated into both administration and teaching in many institutions.

Virtually all educational institutions now use Copilot, as they already have plans with Microsoft for Office 365 Enterprise, and Copilot seems to be a natural extension of this collaboration. While the rationale is understandable, there's every reason for these institutions to proceed with caution.

The Core of Dependency

First and foremost, this situation is a textbook example of what's known in the tech world as 'vendor lock-in,' where an organization becomes overly dependent on a single supplier. Even if they wanted to, these institutions probably couldn't leave their partnership with Microsoft without significant costs, as their entire critical infrastructure is built on Office 365 Enterprise. Additionally, GDPR and various procurement rules in the EU further complicate matters. This issue affects more than just education, but in practice, it means Microsoft is the one setting the agenda, not the educational institutions.

By deeply integrating Copilot into the business-critical apps they use - such as Outlook, Word, and Excel - these institutions are not just tying themselves to another single product in the suite, but further and still more disturbingly to Microsoft's entire ecosystem. This dependency drastically limits their future choices and positions them as digital prisoners - institutions that have effectively lost the ability to navigate freely in the technological landscape.

After all, what if educational institutions would want to make demands regarding sustainability, environmental impact, or copyright when they realistically have no alternatives? And what impact will these agendas have on the future of education and student expectations?

It's a well-known phenomenon that tech giants like Google, Facebook, and Amazon have gradually degraded the quality of their products and services once they've achieved a dominant market position. This often happens under the guise of "innovation" or "user-friendly updates," but in reality, it results in a deterioration of the user experience and a restriction of user choice. Microsoft is no exception in this regard.

Many institutions have recently moved their Microsoft apps to the cloud, or are in the process of doing so. Microsoft naturally measures the use of their various apps, and in a cloud-based solution, this has become even easier. The next logical step could be to remove the most used products from the bundle solutions and charge extra for them afterward.

You may have heard the expression, 'If you're not paying for a digital service, you're the product.' That's no longer the case. Institutions pay and they're the product.

But isn't Copilot at least a good app?

In short, the user experience in Copilot leaves much to be desired compared to competitors like ChatGPT and Claude.ai. The system isn’t very intuitive to use, there is no memory function available, and the context window is too small for any substantial, dedicated use case. This may sound like tech details, but these issues are actually fairly critical to the broader implementation of generative AI in educational institutions in Denmark right now.

In a sense, Copilot currently functions a bit like an old mobile phone that can only write SMS messages of up to 160 characters, while competitors are significantly more advanced. Despite Microsoft's marketing machine, the product is in reality far from the best and most user-friendly generative AI systems on the market.

At the same time, the aforementioned integration into Microsoft's ecosystem makes it difficult for most higher ed users to evaluate and implement potentially superior alternatives. Institutions risk pressing pause on their technological development and being trapped in a system that doesn't necessarily serve their or the students' best interests.

There are indisputably better alternatives in this area, and there are also players who prioritize data security and ethically responsible development of the systems.

But would institutions be willing to pay a potentially higher price for more sustainable and technically superior solutions than Copilot?

Conclusion

There's nothing wrong with using Microsoft Office 365 Enterprise. Microsoft Office supports the work of many people in the education sector every single day. The point is simply that relying on Microsoft must not become a passive choice, especially when it comes to generative artificial intelligence.

If educational institutions in Denmark want to regain control of their digital futures, they must first cultivate an awareness of their current technological dependencies.

More broadly, I believe educational institutions have both the right and the obligation to help shape the digital future, and this obligation will only grow in the coming years. Higher education institutions must ensure that they are at the forefront of technological development in the future, as this is obviously necessary to create good platforms for critical thinking and innovation.

Students' futures and the integrity of these institutions depend more than ever on their ability to navigate wisely in the digital landscape.

The complexity is great, granted, but the project here is ultimately to create a digital future in line with the core values of educational institutions.

And with all due respect, it is probably not Microsoft that knows best what those values look like.