The way I see it either the consequences for not respecting DNT need to be greater somehow or the default implementation can't be DNT=1 because third parties will simply ignore it. Without consequences, a default of DNT=1 just weakens the draft and hurts the people who really do want to block everything.
Everyone seems to be confusing privacy with "tiny amounts of information" such as age, gender, etc. which most people are perfectly happy entering on basically any site.
It shouldn't be advertised as "Do not track gives you privacy" it should be advertised as "Do not track stops companies from saving personal information about you, such as age, gender and location. Whilst this increases your level of anonymity while you browse, it also lowers the companies ability to provide you with a valuable experience, for instance, it can stop adverts popping up which you may find irrelevant and will allow them to better follow your needs online."
But ignoring the setting is just plain arrogant.
If they were serious about this, they would just block those cookies by default. Otherwise it's pointless, and having Microsoft decide for the user makes the advertiser's decision to ignore it even easier.