Not really.
Microsoft Ireland Operations Limited (MIOL) is owned by Round Island One a Bermuda corporation
Round Island One is owned by Round Island LLC which is a Nevada corporation
Round Island LLC is owned by Microsoft a Washington State corporation

Round Island LLC and Microsoft are subject to USA law and as owners are responsible for making sure that Round Island One and MIOL aren't criminal organizations.

Absolutely. If we signed a treaty with the EU countries involving data privacy that would be USA law. We haven't.

What can they be extradited for? You can only be extradited for something that's a crime in both jurisdictions.

.. and presumably the USA government (or agents thereof) can thus be held on conspiracy charges in those other countries.

Held where? The judges ordering this are in the USA.

The world is starting to move away from USA technology? By what possible metric?

That's fine. As long as all American cannot comply with the subpoena they are good. But let's be clear the courts can insist on active compliance. So for example if they have the authority to change the policy regarding who has credential to get the data they must do so. If they have some other way of getting the data they must. They also could be in legal jeopardy for paying the admin (directly or indirectly) after he fails to comply since now his actions are part of a criminal conspiracy. The government has no intention of allowing there to be a situation where companies get to freely obstruct justice.

But only people outside the jurisdiction of the courts are obstructing American justice.

No. The people inside the jurisdiction of the courts informed their foreign counterparts not to give them access to documents under subpoena (directly or indirectly). That's obstruction of justice.

Did the subpoena prevent you from informing your foreign employer of what was happening?

If your foreign employer would respond by preventing you from complying then yes it does.

What if you don't 'know that for sure'.

Whether you committed obstruction or not is going to up for the criminal courts to decide. But lots of people are in prison who got cute with the law. If 12 Americans believe you did know for sure, or suspected that was the likely outcome...

What if your local lawyer 'was certainly unaware of that' (once made aware, he will be dirty and have to move on.)

A lawyer participating in a criminal conspiracy has an even lower burden of proof to be disbarred.

A wholly owned subsidiary's parent company can be instructed to order them to do something. That doesn't solve the problem. They need to be separately owned.

And of course if they are:

a) Foreign owned
b) Operate exclusively in foreign countries
c) Those foreign countries refuse to obey US court orders

That allows USA intelligence services to get involved.

Nope. USA corporations are USA legal persons. Their first obligation is to USA law. Same as Twenga's first obligation is to French law.

Apple isn't a Chinese corporation. But if it happened with Huawei for example, no they would not be upset. That's the government of China doing their job.

The USA isn't defining other countries laws. They are ordering their corporations (people under USA law) to obey an order of a USA court and possibly disobey the orders of a foreign government. Certainly the companies can petition USA courts with their problem with compliance and ask for exceptions. But ultimately yes: the USA government has the right to tell a USA corporation to violate the laws of another country.

I don't have a problem with countries that don't want to comply with USA courts not having access to USA technology and using their own systems. Then the UN can get involved. But no question: Amazon, Microsoft, Google... are obligated to obey court orders.

Swiss banks with US offices most certainly do have to produce those sorts of records.