My original switch, in 1999, was motivated by fairly standard Stallman-esque moral oposition to proprietary software.

About that time, I was starting to write more serious code, and quickly discovered that hacking on GNU/Linux is a lot more fun than hacking on Windows. So that made it easier to stick with GNU/Linux during some of the frustrations. (And there were plenty.)

Since about 2002, Linux frustration is a rare, rare thing. Debian (and now Ubuntu) just make sense. Software installation (and updating) is a breeze, system configuration too. Programs usually work like you'd expect them to work, and most of the time, if they don't you can change them easily. I've never lost data in an application crash, and I've never even experienced a system crash.

These days, it drives me up the wall when I have to use Windows in the computer lab on campus. Just last week, I lost two hours' work in Word because Internet Explorer crashed. I have absolutely no desire to swtich back.

I suppose the upshot is: I really do believe that GNU/Linux (and especially Debian) is manifestly superior to Windows. But switching still is (and might always be) enough of a challenge that some motive other than a desire for the best OS must be present to get you through the transition.

Small world, indeed. That was Dark Carnival in Berkeley, and the book was the Difference Engine. Bruce Sterling was there as well. I remember him mentioning using a typewriter, but I think that was for the Neuromancer trilogy, not his work after that. I got the distinct impression however that he was not much of a technology enthusiast personally, along with what I took as almost physical dislike of the "cyberpunk" label. I don't know if my impression of his work has changed so much as that I simply have gotten older and seen more of the world. Neuromancer in 2005 simply can't have the same impact that it did on me in the summer of 1986, when a friend lent me his copy.