And you think this administrator is you rather than some botnet master taking advantage of your unpatched system? :-)
Potentially letting criminals control my machine in order to avoid giving slightly more control over my machine to Microsoft than they already have seems like the wrong choice to me.
If I was so concerned about Microsoft's updates that I would even consider this option, I would be urgently looking to replace Microsoft as my OS vendor. And if that wasn't an option (because lock-in) I would hold my nose and choose Microsoft over organised crime.
Citation? Running a Wineserver should use less resources than a complete Win32 runtime.
Maybe things have changed since my last test (Ubuntu on my ~2011 MBA installed ~12mo ago)
Yup. I use my computer to achieve things, whether extraordinary or mundane. I could run most of my software through WINE or some form of virtualization on Linux, but at the cost of jank. Why would I bother with inferior experience for sake of dogma? It's not even all my software either.
>Corporate compliance?
While compliance doesn't apply in my case, doing business dictates my computer be generally compatible with the other party's computer. So that means Windows and Office.
>Familiarity?
Yup. Windows is reliable, MacOS is limited and Linux just wastes my time.
Been working this way since Windows Update has been a thing, and I've never been let down. Judging by the many tales of people getting grief from Windows Update, I'm perfectly content to continue as I have. I will run system updates when it pleases me, and no sooner.