Does it mean people prefer to be told what to do with it, instead of figuring it out based on existing features? It would assume an approach that reflects some lack of creative thinking.
It means that if you're creating a product that has a low level of awareness (common for startup products), then you need to emphasize benefits ("with product x, you'll get y result") rather than features ("product x is made with technology x,y,z").
Of course, it's a gross simplification to assume it's always the best and only way to communicate about a product (people who already know about the benefits will still want to know about the features), or that all products benefits from that approach (products that are mature are well understood, and talking about their benefits makes you sound like an idiot stating obvious things).
One place where the benefits vs. feature distinction is important is in coming up with new product ideas: if you think in terms of benefits (it gets you X) instead of features (it's like X, except we switched tech-stack-X with tech-stack-Y), it helps you understand why people will buy it and where the value really lies.
I do not agree that people buy things because it makes them better. They buy things because they perceive them as having higher utility (i.e. they satisfy their desires more than the alternatives). Being "better" is only one of many desires.
