I wouldn't consider a lot of their patches 'updates' . They really do far less than they should get credit for most times.
maybe but as a matter of fact, XP was a pile of crap at launch, worse than win2k which was already plagued by problems (at launch). Debugging & fixing, is by far the most daunting & time consuming programming task of a project. Accorded that there is still some crap in XP like the poor explorer.exe which still have (as of today) a handle leak (unlike win2k by the way). Yet you can't really deny the amount of fixing work that went into it
galciv2 is very comparable being plagued by an awful amount of bugs the first few month ... and also any project, which is as widespread as windows is, will get in the spotlight of some underground people to exploit weaknesses in the code...
as an example, on some hacker convention, linux was left unhacked because of lack of interest, not because of lack of possibility ...