You're saying that, as if things would be alright, as long as the number of people who have no problem outweigh the number of people who have a problem.
Windows phone is a great example, after over a decade they put out something that was not terrible, and it's failing because not terrible only works in monopoly situations.
Yes, several versions from around 2003 to 2016.
The one complaint I remember having was that apps outside of the main screen were pretty terrible to navigate. And that so many apps were terrible.
I am a .Net developer and I have few apps on my phone, so it really is the base phone I am talking about.
Other than that, there's nothing for me to forgive. I'm genuinely happy with the phone.
Is it really so impossible for you to understand that I might feel differently about the product than you do?
But, I can accept we have different standards.
How long do you think it would take for people to abandon a Linux distribution if it started auto-updating and locking people out randomly in the process? Of course Linux systems don't tend to have this problem because they can update while running.
Because this is Windows, users are left helpless while they lose time watching progress bars. The only reason this is accepted at all is through vendor lock in via the various MS ecosystems (Office, VS etc.), and because savy MS-centered developers can go through some pains to disable it on their own systems, after paying the freedom tax (the Enterprise license).