There's a big difference between "just good enough" and "sucks". To put in terms of cars, since you like that territory, most car companies make their handling "just good enough" rather than make it excellent. Only BMW and a few others put such a premium on handling that they make it excellent. As BMW introduces handling features that seem to catch on, and as the cost of developing those things drops, they are then adopted by other manufacturers, and become part of the "just good enough". But would you say that the handling of an Intrepid "sucks" because it doesn't match a BMW M3?
The major auto manufacturers believe the battles for their customers are fought on different territory. Safety, ease of getting children in and out, gas mileage, perhaps reliability, and definitely lower-cost production are where they choose to put their money.
Likewise, Microsoft is trying to figure out where the customers need to be in the future, and investing money in a radical new area. They are not content to just chase Apple with an evolving desktop system, but are instead trying to innovate around the concept of highly connected systems. That doesn't sound much like the auto manufacturers, does it?
Oh yeah. Now that I think about it I always search out mediocrity in products.
Good points. A neighbor of mine has a 90's M3 and I went for a ride in it recently. When he found a safe stretch he nailed it and it was like the WHOOSH! you get from a modern roller coaster. I laughed out loud in glee.
At times you'll hear a Mac afficionado claim that Apple is the BMW of computers. I dispute this because one has to be thoroughly steeped in the Apple mythos to believe that the Mac offers an essentially "other" computer experience, on the level of exhilaration.
Apple has a better corporate identity shell, but they aren't offering quantum leaps in user experience analogous to an M3 vs. Intrepid.