I preface these comments by saying I have never tried to climb Everest and never will. I have (and continue to) climb in places where the weather and the conditions can kill you.
http://www.cnn.com/2016/05/25/world/everest-deaths-climb-maria-strydom/index.html in this article on CNN.com, the mother of one of the climbers who died last week expressed concerns about how her daughter acclimatized, how much time she spent about 26,000 feet (the so-called death zone), and the lack of real-time information she received about her daughter's welfare.
Death in the mountains is tragic. In my view, it is a known risk, particularly in places where climbers are known to have died in the past. There has been a lot written about those risks in the Himalaya, including Everest - high altitude, cold, bad weather, avalanche, overcrowding that leads to delays. Into Thin Air brought home the impact that a bottleneck can have along the most popular route to the top, leaving climbers waiting for longer than they anticipated.
Are people with limited experience in that situation are equipped to make critical decisions, especially when their brains are running on limited oxygen? Can they tell the difference between the normal pain and fatigue and high altitude pulmonary or cerebral edema, for example? When should climbers who have expended their reserves turn back? this is a particularly thorny issue when clients have paid a lot of money and have a lot of motivation to get to the top.