Come on guys, most of you live in the US. Bread in the US is basically sponges. How could that even possibly be hard. If there's one thing that Europe is better at than the US it has gotta be making bread. You know with an actual crust. And of course you eat the ends, too.
I am baffled.
It depends on the bread. A question like the OP's would only be able to be asked if it were a global attribute of all bread. If some bread's crust was horrible and some bread's crust is utterly delicious, then how can anyone properly vote in the poll or answer the question at face value?
So the next step is to wonder what kind of bread people are eating on average. I see a lot of white bread being used as a cheap way to just have bread at all, and in my own household, we eat a lot of Challah due to perfectly innocent goatless socio-religious rituals that do not involve slaughter or sacrifice in any way. The quality of the bread depends on the dryness and flavor of the crust. Some crust ends up being burned and browned, and it's rather nasty, and I'm more than happy to discard it and throw it on the lawn. Some crust is moist, eggy, flavorful, and just scrumptious. It's a joy to eat. And that's from the same "category" of Challah bread! It all depends on how it was made.
There's this Stop & Shop (Large chain grocery store) near us that has in their deli area these semi-premade large sandwiches with Ciobatta bread and assorted delicious ingredients internally. The crust is as much a part of the bread as the internals of the bread are, so there's really no reason not to eat it. It's a similar taste, with a gritty but rugged texture that feels like an accomplishment to eat, and all without a nasty burnt flavor.
So, ... ... if the same question as the OP's were to be asked again, I'm sure it would need a lot of clarification and terms to it.