Is there premise in the manifesto you would disagree with?
The biggest problem with it that I see is this one: "Working software over comprehensive documentation". It sounds good, it is also a very convenient premise to believe in - many developers hate writing documentation. But I it think misses an important part of the problem - software is only part the product. Arguably, it is not the most important part of the product as well. If we can solve a problem without writing any software, for example by updating the documentation - everyone would win.
If a user cannot use the software or software does not solve user problem - it doesn't matter if it is working or not.
As an extreme and somewhat sobering example, lets consider Boing Max disaster.
Boing Max had the capabilities to overrun faulty autopilot commands, but because it was never properly communicated in the manuals pilots could not use the functionality. Mostlikely they even didn't understand its significance. The decision to compromise on a documentation part resulted in 3 planes crashing, killing hundreds of people.
It seems that Manifest was designed for a particular point of time and a particular environment and wasn't supposed (or ready) to be universally adopted.
What do you think?