Having been involved in the actual fight between IBM and Microsoft (which IBM struggled about as much as a corpse would in a prize boxing fight) I can tell you that Windows didn't get to where it did purely on the basis of it being the best there is.
Windows is a default choice. There's nothing else viable in the commercial market - OS/2, Linux variants and Unix had little to offer in the way of commercial-operation software and what they DID have wasn't flexible enough nor did it come close to the ease of use that it needed to get decent market share and become a serious player. Hence Windows won by default.
Using that as an argument against Apple sits poorly with me, because while Apple dominated the music/graphics arena and built its main base from there, Microsoft built its empire from providing something the corporate world wanted first and then needed. Staff would go home having become accustomed to the Windows environment and they'd buy the same, so they didn't have to learn new environments.
OS/2 today is dead. Its "successor" - Ecom Station - is such a minority niche market it's not worth considering for a commercial enterprise that needs to be able to open documents that its clients or business associates are sending. It needs to work on current hardware, and unfortunately it's only supporting stuff that's 5 years old or more.
Linux is a total pain in the ass for the user. The interface is clunky, making shortcuts to things is difficult, users don't want to know that they need to "chmod 777" their folders or any other bullshit. It's for nerds, and it will be the nerds' stomping ground, at least until they can get rid of ALL of the technical stuff and keep it simple.
Because by and large, the average computer user doesn't WANT to know any of that - nor should they need to. The computer SHOULD be a tool, it SHOULD be easy to use and in THAT respect Microsoft did a better job than its competitors. We'll overlook the marketing ploys they used - like signing developers into a Windows-exclusive contract to prevent them from developing for other platforms, this is in spite of Microsoft's own Excel development team using the OS/2 platform "because it's stable and doesn't crash every half an hour".
So there's a LOT more to the argument. Apple would like more of the market but they're stuck in the niche area and don't do themselves any favours by not allowing some flexibility. They still have a dedicated following and have survived in spite of themselves.
And just so you don't think I'm trying to fly an MS flag ... I currently maintain several OS/2 boxes, I prefer using Linux, I would love to see Android mature even further. But I am FORCED to use Windows on my work machine so that I can use the tools and create documents etc that my clients can use - because they're in the corporate world, and they use Windows.
And just to remain on topic - I am currently fighting the Android tendency to put things "in the cloud" at the moment. My new phone won't let me store my contacts on my phone's sim, they have to be stored in my Google account (Samsung Galaxy Nexus). It's a PITA but I've turned off syncing for the time being, because there are some things I don't want stored in a place where others could get access to it.
And Google has been hacked into before - let's never forget that there are clever companies out there making clever security mechanisms, but there are also clever buggers out there breaking into through those mechanisms too.