Yes 10 can be a bit iffy, so can 7.
Key difference for me though is when you try to sort issues - way too often with 10 they've either tried to take control away from the end user or they've implemented such a complicated system you can't actually do anything (without a ton of messing about) - without resorting to a full wipe and reinstall. At least with 7 you can usually take control, isolate the issues and sort it on your own terms even if they are a bit of a pain sometimes to fix.
Also I have to laugh at he people touting 10 as being more secure, largely on that basis of it being newer and shinier, sure there is the element that newer is usually better supported on the security front but right now they are so many security issues with 10 at such a high frequency that any such point is completely null and void until MS get their **** together - some of these security issues 100%
should not have been there in the first place. For some reason when Intel have as critical security issues everyone is up in arms about it but when it is MS it almost goes uncommented on and some of the recent MS ones have actually been a lot more usable against the average consumer than the Intel ones that are more useful against specific targets in multi-user or server/hosting environments. Granted to their credit MS have been on the ball fixing these issues but as above too many of them shouldn't have even existed in the first place.
EDIT: Had a good chuckle reading an article earlier - every other paragraph was mentioning unspecifically how Windows 7 was insecure, old and a recipe for malware while all but one of the security issues they mentioned were Windows 10 specific and the one Windows 7 issue was patched by MS anyhow - it was almost like they were paid to keep saying how bad 7 was.