I wouldn't say Microsoft is "getting a pass" -- they're being panned pretty hard for the problems.
And Apple's had a few products that (initially) had issues -- who can forget the original iPhone 4 antenna design problems, and the deathless Apple response, "You're holding it wrong" (i.e. holding it the way 90% of smartphone users hold it). Apple was roundly trounced, but came back eventually with a revised design that works great (I have an iPhone 5c and love it).
I don't doubt that Microsoft will address these Surface issues. If they're design-related, and widespread enough, we'll see a new version of the hardware appear, and possibly a recall if they can't fix it with software updates. If they're manufacturing-related, that'll be interesting. I'm not sure who Microsoft has doing their manufacturing on these products.
The only problem with AntennaGate is that it was primarily a dis-information FUD campaign orchestrated by the competition with the help of Android's owner Google. The Antennas on the iPhone worked well and did not attenuate any more than any other phone available at the time when covered by a hand. This was easily demonstrated. The iPhone model when introduced throughout the rest of the world with NO MODIFICATIONS to the antennas had ZERO problems with dropped signals. The antenna design actually was BETTER on this model iPhone than all previous iPhones and the model went on to sell far more than any other without modification.
AntennaGate was a problem created by an incompetent report issued by Consumer Reports who used Apple's own signal strength bars as if they were scientific measure of dB signal strength instead of an algorithm driven representation of relative signal strength exactly the same as every other cell phone's relative bars. Apple had changed their algorithm with their new model to more accurately represent the actual proportional signal strength instead of wighting lower signal strengths higher to make them look higher as the others were doing and even Apple had been doing in the past. As a result, the graphic representation of bars would show only three bars on Apple's new phone, when the others would be showing four or even five bars of signal. CR made the assumption that the new iPhone was receiving LESS of a signal when in actual fact, it was receiving a BETTER signal then the other phones because of the exterior antennas. . . even if they were being bridged. (Again, demonstrated by REAL experts with REAL scientific testing equipment.) CR did not know that a setting on the phone could substitute a digital display in exchange for the Bars chart. . . showing the actual dB of signal strength being received. . . So they merely used a comparison of bar charts to rate the phones down, starting the whole AntennaGate!