Earlier quoted context omitted.
It doesn't seem to me that the is trying to paint microsoft as a victim. IT even says they are partially) to blame because of their poor security design. The article suggested that most software should be delivered as a service, so that it would more directly connect the economic incentives with the bug fixing. Then they pointed out how this would have helped everyone involved in this one specific case.
Exactly. The article isn't excusing Microsoft. But it's also arguing for a subscription model that aligns incentives.
That is a powerfully simple way to think about, I am going to mull that thought of. But yes, at least superficially, it puts customer and vendor on the same track.
I wonder if there are ways it could be abused? Of course there are, we just haven't found them all yet.