It seems to me like if Microsoft would take a step back on telemetry and cumulative forced updates, they'd have pretty much a home run. But it seems like they're just outright ignoring any feedback on both issues until the issues magically go away or stop talking about it.
I'm honestly willing to give a pass on the forced updates. It's a hard place, as most people will never run updates, and we end up with botnets taking down Dyn. The downside, of course, is the debacle with the anniversary update. I wish they had a better update process..
The telemetry, on the hand, really does need to be a lot more transparent and much easier to opt out of...
I understand it for consumers. If it was Home edition only, fine. The problem is when Microsoft issues a cumulative update that A. fixes a critical vulnerability and B. breaks network printing, as an IT administrator I have to decide whether I want to leave a gaping security hole in our network until Microsoft fixes the printing issue, or push the update and break everyone's workflow until Microsoft fixes the printing issue.
In the past, I'd simply hold the update that breaks network printing, and push the security update.
On the forced updates, I've certainly felt the annoyance at finding my PC unexpectedly rebooted with no warning. On the other hand, they've been getting hammered hard on security for so long, and probably a big part of the reason why is people delaying or not installing security patches. It's tough to find a good compromise between forcing the entire world to update immedately, no matter what their situation is, and multi-million machine botnets wreaking havoc on the internet.
