I'm in two minds about this. On the one hand, philosophically, the user should be in charge of their PC, and updates should happen at a time of their choosing.

On the other hand, people are idiots. Especially the type of people who think they know everything but in reality don't. The type that will search for registry hacks or scripts that disable updates, and proceed to live without any security patches, putting not only their own system/data at risk, but others too.

It's probably a necessary evil that MS forces security patches on users.

What isn't so forgivable is them pushing all the other crap on people, or why the updates take so fucking long on shutdown/startup. That's what they need to improve. Far fewer people would care about avoiding updates if a reboot after an update was imperceptibly different to any normal startup, like it is on Linux.

MS is a $3tn company. They can achieve this if they want to, but they see spending money on Windows as a waste of money - why improve something when you've already cornered the market? It doesn't benefit them. It doesn't make them more money. Windows is dominant either way, they get their licensing fees either way. Improving Windows damages Microsoft.