Um, no Windows isn't the least broken OSes on the planet. In fact, no OS is least broken, they're broken in different ways. Windows is broken on vital security points, which is why Windows Server series has never beaten the *nixes on the server market, and probably never will. Linux is broken from a consumer desktop perspective because there's too many cooks in the kitchen deciding what desktop concepts stay, go, and get modified. It's hard to unlearn Gnome when you're forced to play with KDE4 at work and vice versa. Windows is broken from a hardware perspective because many basic integrated motherboard types are often not supported, and even if they're supported the additional features (such as what you get with AC97) have to be setup with vendor drivers to be accessible. Linux from a software perspective is broken in key points of standards between frameworks, whether it's boost for C++ or GObject, some folks never fucking get the agreements between these right (especially if we're talking about bindings between languages). And so on.
At the end of the day, it's not a matter of FOSS folks being against capitalism as many are in the business of support and development of their products. It's about Microsoft wanting to tell what other firms should do and how to do it. This is more the case under Ballmer than it was under Gates as at least Gates knew better than to dick with others agendas (when he had his own to attend). It's not a matter of Microsoft's success that ever irks me it's the ideologues that speak for it that get me riled up, and oddly much in the same fashion as I've been riled up by RMS and other Free Software Foundation dillweeds (and for the same reasons). Let us developers do our thing: develop software. I don't care who's 'king' of the desktop so long as I have the freedom to choose what platform, what framework, and what customer(s) to service. Company of origin be damned!