Their market power certainly doesn't enhance their desire to pretend to care; but(at least in my experience as a Windows-shop focused IT minion of some years), feeling threatened has actually caused them to fuck it up more blatantly than feeling powerful ever did.
Old school Microsoft, "Developers, Developers, Developers!", may have charged too much and been dangerously interested in making you dependent on IE6 and activeX, or their freaky extensions to Java; but they also knew where their bread was buttered: Enterprise users might not like the licensing fees; but Microsoft really cared about backward compatibility and roadmap predictability, because enterprise users really cared about that; and while they wanted you to keep all your development on their platforms, they cared a lot about making that as easy as possible. Patch notes and MSDN documentation were often pretty good, just breaking stuff for being 'legacy' was rare and fairly serious, and so on.
Under the influence of iPad envy, by contrast, we got things like Windows 8(Hey guys, people basically like Windows 7, so let's totally ruin the shell!), Windows RT(because who buys Windows in order to run the applications they care about, amirite?) and the various hamfisted attempts to shove WinRT(yes, that's not the same as Windows RT, though Windows RT uses it; brilliant branding there guys) down people's throats before they'd even managed to dogfood it on their own applications; and the like.
Now Nadella's "Services, Services, Cloud, Services!!" stuff appears to be moving toward deprecating old stuff as fast as possible, basically undocumented gigantic rollup patches; absolutely insane episodes like the 'let's silently modify the behavior of the directshow/Windows Media Foundation image capture architecture so that Windows Hello can let you log in with your face' escapade(I can dig up some links, that was quite the fiasco, not in a good position to do so now); and an attempt to tie everything to a nice Microsoft account, have Cortana staring over your shoulder, and assess a subscription fee.
Monopolist-Microsoft was sort of like the cheaper, more user-accessible version of Monopolist-IBM: abusive and expensive; but knew that people used their stuff to get real work done; and weren't dumb enough to pointlessly interfere with that. Overbill? Sure. Engineer lock-in? Hell yeah? Just break stuff because of some passing fad or a desire to sell apps? Not so much.