If the only problem is that we've wasted a lot of time, and in the end one company builds one product that changes the world, then maybe it's worth it.
That is the heart of our confusion here. You are comparing it to a neutral state. Yes, a utilitarian would prefer any positive outcome to that. However, I was implying that there was another path that would have resulted in an even more positive result but through inefficiency we were left with a lesser but still positive result. That waste of resources like time and money is equivalent to a waste of utility that a utilitarian would obviously oppose.
Ah, the old "I intended the exact opposite of what I said" ploy.