I do think MS is pricing SQL too high for standard edition. It makes postgres more attractive.
If you can afford the license costs and need all the features, SQL Server is fine. But the price increases and unwanted/unused features and bugs and bad interfaces that get marked as "Status: Closed as Won't Fix" make you question if every project requires the latest version.
Sometimes the only thing that keeps SQL Server in the project is that the client never looks bad if they pick a Microsoft solution. On web based projects, many of them don't care, as long as it's secure and backed up.
If I don't need any feature beyond a reliable, maintainable RDMS, why wouldn't I consider Postgres, if I can administer it? This is the reality the Redmond faces. Many projects don't need their products, so how can they make their solutions more desirable? This is true for their server products and Visual Studio too.