[tajen]

The total of fines Microsoft has already faced from the European Commission is €2bn. It's mostly for forgetting to give the browser choice in Vista, if I remember well, after doing it properly in XP, and for not publishing the documentation of an API. On the other hand, given automatic upgrades are now a habit, and given Microsoft's monopoly is on a very narrower market (so, not sure it's a monopoly), I'm not sure they can be pursued, if the story is confirmed. Unless we also pursue Chrome's automatic updates.

[compbio]

Most users will (rightly so) view this as an OS upgrade, not as an update. You already gave MS permission to provide you with security updates. You did not give MS permission to upgrade your OS. I feel the difference is of importance as updates are often necessary, while upgrades are not.

  This update installs the Get Windows 10 app, which
  helps users understand their Windows 10 upgrade options
  and device readiness.

https://support.microsoft.com/en-us/kb/3035583

[Silhouette]

One type of update is fixing a defect in the original product -- closing a security vulnerability that should never have been there, fixing some function that didn't work as advertised because of a bug, that kind of thing.

Another type of update changes to the product in ways that are not necessary for the original product to be used as intended. They may be desirable for the customer and/or the developer, and there's nothing wrong with that. However, from the point of view of things like consumer protection law that says you should get what you paid for and it should work as advertised, these two cases look qualitatively different to me.