to be just as stable as Linux.
Windows is highly customized to support antivirus and to run games. For instance, the so-called DirectX is nothing but a direct access to the hardware so the games can run smoothly. But this doesn't come without a cost. Before being launched, Microsoft employees millions of dollars to test and fix it. Many companies have the exact same challenge, which is called technical debt, the extra time the developer needs to ship a feature due overall instability.
On the other hand, Linux is an OpenSource software that is maintained by volunteers, so it can't afford the same quality assurance process. Instead, it relies on a simple design that limits itself. While Windows dominates the market for games and corporate computers, Linux thrives on servers and mobile because of its affordable dependability. Why don't SMB companies simplify their software just like OpenSource software?
from everything except itself
Chemistry solutions
It's tempting to change the very nature of the matter. This enables great customization to solve a great variety of problems. But, something created from scratch is not time-proof, and some of the decisions can hide unwanted consequences.
Physics solutions
Sometimes the same problem can be solved by arranging components that are already stable. This results in a more dependable solution, because the components are reliable, although the system itself is not.
Biology solutions
Of course the greatest dependability arrives from natural selection itself. Knowing the variety of species can help you to configure the exact name of the species that already solves the problem you have, but customization is not possible.
the harder it will be to actually have control.