Seriously dude. Tone down the anger some, and study history some more.
You might want to start off with the essay The Rise of "Worse is Better". It lays out a pretty consistent reasoning for why quick to release, flexible software wins the day. It doesn't have to have all the features that are possible, it doesn't have to be 100% stable. Software that is in users hands NOW and enables them to be productive is worth infinitely more than bug free (or even just "far less buggy") software that may be available some date in the future.
All large software projects have huge lists of bugs. Heck you can even take estimated metrics of Bugs/Line of Code. Even with really damn good coders, once you have millions of lines of code Bugs/LOC is going to bite you in the ass.
Managers and companies set schedules - not programmers.
This is true for everybody in a company. Their job and delivery schedule is based upon the needs of the company.
Marketing idiots says we need feature x because he has a hard-on and absolutely no basis to demand feature x.
Typically some large customer who is willing to pay large sums of money is requesting the feature. Those same large sums of money go to pay your salary. In some cases, especially for one off features, it may be the case that a large company will have a work stoppage if the feature isn't implemented. Or perhaps the software package is not nearly of as much use to them without that feature.
Your job is to make USABLE software. Software that isn't usable isn't worth anything to anyone.
Programmers do their best to create feature in y duration. Its buggy. This is known. The company releases it anyways.
If a company continues with that practice, eventually they will get a reputation for writing low quality software and they will find themselves in a poor financial situation.
In regards to how much Microsoft is to blame for this, have you taken a look at any other enterprise software vendors? Be it Java2 EE, SAS, or IBMs latest and greatest product, enterprise software development is an ugly picture no matter who is producing the tool chain.
(Actually J2EE can be done properly if you have the right people in charge, I am pretty sure SAS and LOTUS are always horrid horrid things to get close to however. :) )