yes some updates are literally worse than malware
and this has been a problem long before windows 10 forced irrefusable updates
an example is windows 7 and dotnet updates
I have experience that >75% of dotnet updates(nearly 100% of security dotnet updates) broke dotnet and required a manual re-install, which didn't uninstall the update, bringing up the question," how did the update break it in the first place if it is still installed and working?"
this seems less of an issue with windows 10, except features nobody want like copilot(as the last commenter mentioned) or phone sync(which I am 100% >99% of users are annoyed it keeps asking you to set up and doesn't let you say "shut up and never ask me again and permanently disable this feature"
the issues has always been microsoft failing to listen to users and laws, it is a fact that they got sued and lost over many past anti-trust violations and literally stealing but rebranding the exact code from 3rd-party disc compression(the evidence is freely publically available and they once deleted my post saying this because they want to pretend their past was always great, no company is ever perfect)
what they need to do is start reading their own forums for ideas, and just fire the idea department who thought that forced automatic updates and automatic unconfirmed reboots was ok, for literally anyone(especially bad for businesses and people who run software that is incapable of a graceful windows call shutdown and resume, which is very common actually)
the issue with updates being avoided was due to several factors, none of which is fixed by forcing updates automatically with no option to refuse or postpone pointless reboots for non-kernel updates(which can be applied by simply selectively restarting affected services, like linux already does and I was able to do once when I knew what the update did, which Microsoft should know and include a script to restart those services and not the entire PC
1: updates that are guaranteed to break something: this is still common, though the breakage is less expected for any dotnet updates, they seem to have realized that the dotnet team should be the first to review the dotnet updates prior to rollout
2: non-kernel updates requiring kernel reboots: this was never actually a requirement, linux has never rebooted for non-kernel updates, it has always had a nice little guio that says what software is using the affected updated code and waits for you to close it manually or to click "close and reopen my software" which you would do for browsers with resume features built-in because closing all those windows is a hassle
3: lack of suitable internet access or data cap for update downloads: pretty obvious, >10 years ago we didn't have as much broadband access with >=1tb data caps for home internet, and as microsoft refused to offer a mail-order update disc to bypass this limitation, most users refused updates because the limited data and speed was saved for the actual browsing and downloads they wanted(I still had dial-up when I first tried windows 7, after windows 8 was already out, and I think already 8.1 with 8.2 soon after I upgraded)
note that none of those reason were "users were not aware of or remembered to install updates and reboot", which is the false never-existent reason we have forced updates today
