This is pretty much what I said in my FCR - when mission plus first came out, John wrote a long summary of M+ in the Small Groups testing for M+. I'm not going to repost, as it's his to post, not mine, but essentially he mentioned a lot of common failings, and had offered to help, but was rebuffed. It seem that with many Pilot projects (like iinitial Tablet device, Surface) the pilots opinion is not desired, and actually rejected as "we don't know what we want" and someone who in in charge of the project (typically NOT a pilot) make a decision that many of the pilots dislike.

My largest complaint about M+ is that a "Tablet based flight plan software" could of been so much more - instead, we basically have an App that cuts up the flight plan into many, many chunks and spreads it throughout the App, in no apparent fashion, while leaving out important parts of the HTML flight plan, and initially leaving out several important features (NOTAM filtering, crew rest, always in night mode).

For example, why can't it be a two-way app, where we see the fuel load, then we can request any additional fuel within the app? It could have implemented a Flight Family style chat within the app with the dispatcher. Instead, if we want to change the fuel load, we have to call or ACARS the dispatcher to be sure we make contract to change the fuel load.

Why can't we tap on a MEL and get taken to the MEL in Aerodocs? Seems obvious but not possible as far as I know.

One point, now when they say, "we're focused out IT resources on implementing the Contractual items for now" that really mean, no extra money for anything new. All the IT resources have been used up apparently - I wouldn't hold your breath for any new M+ features.