I think the main point the parent comment is making is that, today and historically, the great majority of contract disputes today don't involve disputing (analog or digital) signatures. People usually dispute about all the other terms rather that about the act of having signed it. [Even though analog signatures aren't particularly secure either]
However, if Microsoft signatures have now became more forgeable at scale, perhaps we could see some rash of fake contract fraud in the future where disputing fact of signature becomes more common.
However, if Microsoft signatures have now became more forgeable at scale, perhaps we could see some rash of fake contract fraud in the future where disputing fact of signature becomes more common.