You don't want 350 posts in response and you label anyone who disagrees a "fanboy", yet you're more than happy to have your say and start a flamewar yourself.
Ah, and here it starts. When did I ever say "anyone who disagrees"? That is a deliberately false statement.
With the exception of Linux user forums, it is a usual thing in any thread (I've seen it on this very forum) which has "Windows" in its title that whenever you say something that is not outright a praise for Microsoft, you get a fanboy shitstorm. Except after Vista came out, then it was the opposite...
I am not feeling wrong about pointing out that I'm being annoyed by that and that I am not willing to go into a (another) dicussion how awesome Windows 10 is in someone's opinion. I don't care about anyone's opinion. They can like it or hate it, I don't mind.
I said one may have valid reasons to upgrade to Win10, and if one thinks that Win10 offers a significant benefit that one absolutely needs, well, then
by all means one should upgrade. But without a valid reason, one should not.
"Free offer runs out" alone is not a valid reason, and Win10 has some noticeable disadvantages as well. Excessive network traffic is one of them, and if you have read the OP's post carefully, network bandwidth is exactly one of the things the OP cares about.
You are saying that a free offer is not bad per se. I say it is (at least in the present form) a strong indicator, not only as a general warning sign -- again, you can be of different opinion but I'm not going to discuss established facts about marketing psychology and con tricks... putting the mark under time pressure is the most well-known con trick -- but also as an indicator on the product's general quality or value.
There was no comparable offer when Windows 7 came out. Why not? Well, because it was not needed.
You could sell Windows 7 for $129 and people would buy it right away. In contrast to that, you must offer Windows 10 for free, and you must push people to take it. You must leave them no other choice by removing Windows 7 from the stores. There is no fallacy in that.
I've seen very little marketing for Windows. A notification to users is not aggressive
Microsoft is not only marketing very aggressively. They have been employing measures which are in my opinion borderline criminal.
For example, they have repeatedly re-issued a number of updated (as "recommended", some with the checkmark turned on automatically) to the unsavy user and re-installed their GWX malware downloader and nagware even after users have explicitly opted out several times. Windows 7 has been actively sabotaged, among other things by several times re-issued covert Win10 telemetry installs, one of them cloaked as security update. The apparent "logic" is that if Win7 gets just as bad as Win10, you can as well upgrade.
There's also tricking unsavy users into believing that installing Windows 10 is the only option, by telling them "Your update is ready, you need to restart, click to restart". This is not merely a "notification". It is deliberately deceptive, exploiting the computer-unsavy user.
Let's also not forget the well-known install countdown story. Again, putting the mark under time pressure, and no obvious way to escape, same con trick as before. This is not aggressive in your opinion? Well, I guess when the Mafia throws a Molotow through your window, that's not aggressive either.
Further, there's the issue with Windows update itself. Some guy at a Windows fan site (I think it was Winfuture, but I might remember wrong?) disassembled the broken updater which suddenly -- after working fine for years -- takes hours if not days now at 100% CPU. He found out that the reason is it calls QueryPerformanceFrequency over and over again in a tight loop (for no apparent reason).
If you make the legitimate assumption that software developers at Microsoft are not inmates of a psychiatric facility who write code while smoking crack, the only logical explanation that remains is: deliberate sabotage.
To make the issue of the update client being broken more serious, manual install updates have been removed, too. Thus, the somewhat computer-savy user cannot use WSUS tools any more. Oh wait, did I say "removed"? That's of course wrong. In fact, Microsoft improved the service. Updates which you could formerly just download and install automated are now available via a vastly superior download service thingie which works only with Internet Explorer with a special ActiveX control installed and where you only need hours for finding each of the roughly 200 updates, which you then need to download one by one.
Ah yes, they made a convenience update rollup, how could I forget that one. My bad. Of course this rollup contains all the covert telemetry updates and all the nagware/ransomware as well, and there is no option to remove them after installing the rollup.
And then, there's threatening users to be "at their own peril" (to quote Chris Capossela) with Windows 7 and stating not to support Skylake and later architectures on any version earlier than Windows 10 for some unspecified (read as: invented) "serious architectural challenges".
And so on, and so on, blah blah...
Not aggressive? Are you kidding me? You must be, because you cannot possibly be serious.
With that in mind, and with the fact in mind that it is indeed very hard to buy a new computer without Windows 10 (but most computers in statistics such as the Valve survey are new computers, they're used by gamers), and with the fact in mind that millions of users have been tricked and coerced into installing Windows 10 against their will, the numbers that you state as "success" are just ridiculous.
