Microsoft has already proven that they do not have the software chops to deliver this. Even if they had the right product managers and UI experts, MS management would torpedo the project and ensure that it gets zero adoption.
And AWS has zero software capability in that regard.
Despite being awful in so many ways, Microsoft Office continues to dominate. It's a "competitive edge" because is has the trust of corporate customers. There are many competitors, but everybody is used to the main one already, and it's "good enough".
In many ways, I prefer to use other models through Pi.
They are extremely capable, much cheaper than Claude, and can get the job done for the software development tasks I use AI for. (Quite a lot these days)
This is going to sound tautological but of course it's not the same, because it's different?
Participants in markets make their own choices from the available options, for their own reasons.
Another way to frame my point is this: not the same for whom? You are but one market participant, and it's at least wobbly thinking for any of us to assume that our set of needs is the archetype.
There's any number of harnesses and people have any number of preferences. Sure, overchoice of imperfect substitutes tends to entrench better-resourced, better-resourced (or better-marketed) alternatives, but it's not a slam dunk.