I think the main complaint is that it seems like Google, instead of developing a great product that people actually want to use, are trying to lock people in to what they already have.

I've never really used Google Groups, but then this might be a good thing in this case. Just trying it quickly, there doesn't seem to be any way to subscribe to a group without getting a Google account, I guess after doing so you might be able to just forward it all to whatever email you want. But to an outsider it certainly doesn't look like "an email listserv", and it's not entirely clear how to use it as such.

Whether this makes Google Groups "shitty", I'm not sure. I guess a large part of it is about expectations. Does Google still claim to "do no evil"? I'm sure if it was Microsoft that was running the service then no one would be surprised.

(Regarding the actual interface, atleast I find for example gmane to have a much better interface, Google Groups seems very bloated with lots of dead space. One additional thing, as a none native English speaker, Google Groups shows for each message, a rather large box with a question asking if I'd like a translation of that post. I have a hard time believing this feature is used enough to warrant the amount of space that's spent on it.)