I've had so many problems with Microsoft in the past that mentioning them all would take far too much time. Gates and his colleagues first stole the operating system that would later become known as Windows. As a consequence, a poor operating system that is continuously changing has been promoted. As a result, the quantity of bloat in the body has increased. A Windows 10 installation may now require anywhere from 25 to 40 GB of space on your machine, depending on the version and flavor (Home, Pro, Enterprise, etc.). It's so bad that only the most recent update takes up 4.8 GB of space.

New changes require me to deal with them on a regular basis since they always seem to find a way to negatively affect or destroy the apps I depend on on my system. The problem is that Microsoft has long adopted a marketing approach that puts the burden of troubleshooting on its users rather than its technical staff. As a consequence, the customer bears the burden of poor design and system integration, and it is mostly due to their concerns that product changes have occurred in recent years. The Surface Pro, which was touted as the company's flagship product and was anticipated to cement the company's position in the hardware market, was an outright disaster from the start. I personally spent more than 20 hours on the phone with their technical support team, trying to fix system-wide problems.

It came to the point where tech forums were filled with others who were having the same problems, frightening away potential customers. Because Microsoft could no longer deny the existence of these problems and was failing to solve them in a timely manner, they needed to come up with a new way to market this product line in order to stay competitive. To do this, they began giving away these units to high-profile television shows in order to arouse in viewers a subconscious desire to own these trash cans. Furthermore, they are very expensive. It seems to have had some success, as I continue to get contacted with Microsoft-related questions.

IBM, on the other hand, had the resources to compete and deliver a better product to market, but it was headed by a group of primitives who lacked vision and were driven by a penny-pinching mentality rather than a vision. As a result, new products sat on the shelf as they squeezed every last cent from the designs that came before them. Many more progressive companies were able to take the lead as a result of this. Another of my pet peeves with IBM is that they acquired Lotus, a much better product to anything Microsoft had or has, and then fired the whole company—all because some jerk somewhere wanted control of Domino for internal communication reasons. I could go on and on if I wanted to, but what's the point? It's already here, and it's succeeded in establishing itself as the dominating power; furthermore, nothing I say will change that.

References 

Ronn White