Re: I'm done with Windows.
They're worried about Joe Schmoe who doesn't know a registry entry from a hair dryer.
That's true, and I have no problem with that (and with all my Linux oldies I tell them to update when they see the blue icon). But often the level of their updates is an issue. Does a working device need the latest drivers, other than where there is a security issue? Does every bit of software need to be at the latest version, especially when there isn't an update for security? Performance improvements are fine, and adding functionality can be fine, but removing stuff?
During updates, W10 deletes programs people use. I don't know if it's that common but it's common enough to be getting a lot of complaints. Settings that people may find hard to locate get reset to MS's preferences, and reportedly (even by MS supporters) get moved to other locations. Manufacturer's drivers get replaced with MS ones, which may not be as good (maybe in some instances better, but I have not yet heard someone thank MS for that). They make the system restart when they want to, rather than when the user wants to (and most home users don't leave their machine on 24/7!).
While I can understand the desire to make stuff more secure, forcing it on people in this manner is not a good way to do things. When people lose work, their internet connection, and sometimes even lose their system, forced updates are a problem.
Making security patches forced, and others optional (especially driver and software/feature removal) would go a long way to addressing these issues.
Making your update process something that doesn't involve a ton of pain would go a long way to helping encourage people to do it. My Linux oldies? They see the blue icon. They click on it. They click on "Install updates" (the program is up in a second or two with a list of updates already ready to go), and type in their password (you don't do day-to-day work in an admin account!). The updates start downloading, and a few minutes later (at most) are installed. The update program closes. They can click on the window behind the update one to go back to what they were doing previously, and will not even notice the rest of the process. At the end of their session they turn their machine off, and a few seconds later (usually within 15 and I cannot recall a Linux machine taking more than a minute to shut down) it has powered down. Next session they turn their machine on and start up is as normal, maybe a little faster if an update did something to improve start up speed. And if there is a restart desired, there is an icon left on the taskbar to let them know that when they're ready, their computer would like a restart.
It is a quick, easy and painless process on Linux. If MS worked on making their updates less noticeable, and only requiring a few moments to do, then people would be happier with them.