What people like you don't seem to understand is how Russia actually is waging this war. We have seen so many wars from USA that we are used to the American way of warfare, which is indiscriminate bombing and destruction of military and civilian infrastructure.
The fact that internet, mobile services, water, sewage, electricity etc haven't been targeted yet is proof of that. Usually in a war these are destroyed to disrupt communication, create panic and lower the morale. And if Russia wanted to they could easily have done this but so far they haven't. They are deliberately avoiding to destroy as much civilian infrastructure as possible. Now Russia might resort to that if it prolongs too much but so far they haven't. That's a further indication that the advancement they have made are within their planning or at least that they aren't desperate yet to do such kind of destruction.
Since am Air Force, F-111 Cold War then F-16 Desert Storm, am going to give you an air force perspective.
Just because you think and perceive some attacks as indiscriminate that does not mean they were. Can the USAF truly go indiscriminate? Yes, but why would we? We do not need 'indiscriminate' to induce fear into enemy forces, we certainly did not in Desert Storm. Even with the manufacturing might of the US, and we hauled everything we needed from the Western Hemisphere, any air commander who went truly indiscriminate would lose his stars or eagles. Even if we trapped a division of enemy troops into an area with no civilians, to go truly 'indiscriminate' would still be stupid and wasteful. If we can drop 10 bombs into a specific point in that trap to induce surrender why the hell would we drop 1000 bombs indiscriminately when 10 bombs did the job?
As far as spinning the Russian performance so far...Good job...But...
Have you consider the possibility that the reason why Russia have not done any 'shock and awe' is because they cannot, not because they would not? When you split your invasion plan three-ways, so are your logistic lines: 3 ways. Then once the war is underway, you let your air commanders allocate how each conduct his part of the invasion plan. You do not, or should not, micro manage.
What if -- just what if -- there were no Russian equivalent of 'shock and awe' is because each air commander do not have sufficient munition to create the initial 'shock and awe' effect and still have enough to conduct the rest of the war?
What if -- just what if -- each air commander does have sufficient munition to create three versions of 'shock and awe' but Poutine underestimated Ukrainian resistance and micro managed his air commanders to restrain themselves?
Both versions of 'what if' constitute strategic errors that ended with what the world is seeing today -- that the Russian military was flawed and inefficient in its execution of the war. You do not see 'indiscriminate' bombing, like the American way of war, so that mean the Russian military is more humane? Damn...!!! Talk about swallowing propaganda.
Edit:
Let us say that I was allocated 1000 bombs to conduct my air campaign. I believe I need 100 bombs to attack a specific target. So I would add %10 or maybe even %25 overhead just to cover unexpected events, as all wars always have. But even so, I would still do everything I can to avoid using all 100 bombs plus overhead. I would call on satellite imagery. If possible, I would assign special ops to give me real time 'eyes on ground' intelligence. I might just even conduct psyops to induce uncertainty into the enemy. In the end I might just need to use 100 bombs plus overhead or maybe just 90 bombs. But I would not use all 1000 bombs in inventory just because I can afford to.