Fine. I wanted a general purpose system that could be used for anything. Games, movie editing, music production, programming, web design, you name it. I also wanted commercial-level programs which generally have more polish and functionality than their FOSS counterparts, in addition to open-source software when suitable. In Windows 7 I can get that, in addition to the feeling of being part of an extremely large and very well supported community who have an answer to virtually every problem that might occur, in virtue of the size of the userbase. In Linux I just feel like the lack of direction means that important stuff never gets fixed. I have no confidence with standby/resume in Linux, I have no confidence in tear-free video playback without having to tweak it myself, I have issues with the fact that I am not able to run programs like Photoshop/Office without WINE or VirtualBox, programs I want because they make life easier than the FOSS counterparts.

People have explained time and time again why Linux sucks on the desktop, but there's too much of an inertia and group mentality to ignore all the information that's OUT THERE ALREADY. So I can't describe it any better except by saying - it offers very little that Windows does not have except ideology and a very, very obsessive fanbase. I end up losing more by sticking with Linux then I do with Windows.

I'm not smug. I think the Linux zealots are smug and have some sort of superiority complex. But whatever, I've been using Linux on and off for the last 10 years and am fed up with its deficiencies on the desktop.

I'm so sick of the supposedly "smart", "tech-savvy" people on Slashdot bitching about Windows getting "viruses"

Agreed. Why am I able to run a butter-smooth Windows 7 machine for ages without being swamped with viruses and other people, who are supposedly fluent with Linux (and hence I assume computers in general) can't? I'd rather just learn how to be smart and stay safe on the net, rather than throw out an entire operating system for another set of problems just because of one little thing.

Agreed. I'll stick with the classics that I still find fun as well the occasional new game that doesn't have oppressive DRM which is also fun. But if it becomes the case whereby virtually all new games require always-on DRM and I end up not having control over my software any longer, then I'll give it up entirely and move onto something else.

These publishers act as if people HAVE to play their games, as if it's an insatiable need rather than a want. Not all of us are so weak-willed.

You can't be a zealot about it and demand NO DRM EVAR! If you do that you'll find your selection fairly limited, however if you meet them half way and say "Only DRM that doesn't mess with my ability to play," you find a whole lot of games.

Please don't label those who are wary of companies who employ any form of DRM as zealots. It's not helpful and disregards any legitimate concerns they might have for not wanting DRM at all. For example, I no longer use Steam because although the DRM is generally reasonably fair (and we're talking stock Steam-DRM and not any addition 3rd-party DRM), I cannot resolve to my satisfaction the lingering concern about what happens if my account is locked/suspended over an issue with a game payment, or a mistake at Valve's or PayPal's end that results in said suspension, or VAC makes a mistake and bans me from VAC servers by accident and I have no resource, etc. I agree they're basically "what if's" but they do bother me, funnily enough. I cannot see myself having a large 100+ games Steam account without continually concerned that the keys to accessing all of my games are with Valve and not in my hands.

Apple now sells DRM-free music. Movie studios are still living in the dark ages but I'm slightly hopeful they'll come around, maybe. Game developers are mixed though, so why would I be a zealot for not wanting DRM? It's generally shown to be cracked after all and it only causes problems for paying customers and not pirates, so I don't touch it. I don't have a problem with SERIAL NUMBERS though as a means of authentication, which are still used even with digital purchases in many cases, but at least I know they don't require activation which is still a bad idea (what if I want to play a game in 10 years and the activation server is no longer running? I still play the original Deus Ex from time to time, so don't tell me old games aren't worth playing).

Just thinking long term here. Most indie games don't have DRM but they also don't have the lasting interest that something like Deus Ex: Human Revolution has. If this DRM trend doesn't turn around soon then I'll have to move onto another hobby. There's plenty other things in life to enjoy that I can have under my own rules.

If publishers keep persisting with this anti-consumer push for always-on DRM, I'll have to find another hobby. Good thing I bought my first Arduino last week.

You have to pay money to your phone company, so sure I have a greater level of expectation over them not screwing with my conversations as opposed to Facebook/MSN, for which I pay nothing. As for the postal service, in Australia it's wholly Government owned and hence comes under appropriate legislation.

I don't know why you were modded insightful. No-one reasonable likes censorship but to think Microsoft/Facebook have to follow your rules even though you don't pay a cent for the server is asinine.

Are you European?

Wrong guess - Australian actually. It's noted that we've weathered the economic crisis pretty well actually, in that it barely affected us (some were affected of course, it's not like we were isolated, but it's hardly as prevalent as it was elsewhere). On top of that I work for the Government in a position that basically can't be lost unless I look at porn or something on the net, since it's a very important and well-funded department and layoffs are basically non-existent. Not that I'm gloating, but I sometimes forget how bad things have gotten for others.

Facebook also blocks TPB links, and has for ages.

Microsoft and Facebook can do what they want - people can't complain too much, they are the company's networks after all, they can do what they want. But at least it's good in reminding people that their messages aren't private, and that there is going to be at least some automated checking of the contents before it's granted clearance to be sent through unaltered. If you really want to use an IM platform that's completely under your control (and not at the risk of censorship), then host your own XMPP server.

Potential Employer: "Er, so you are saying you're not part of any social network online whatsoever?"

You: "Yes, that is correct."

(Potential Employer quietly checks the box next to "Does not play well with others", and upon conclusion of the interview, places your resume in the "don't bother" pile)

The best approach in an interview is to give the potential employer something to work with, rather than just a flat-out denial:
------

Potential Employer: "Er, so you are saying you're not part of any social network online whatsoever?"

You: "Well not exactly. I am a member of several tech sites and forums, helping people with problems and discussing various issues."

PE: "But what if you want to communicate with friends/family?"

You: "Email, the phone, etc. I have a Dropbox account where I share all my photos in the Photos gallery it provides. I don't use Facebook because I don't trust it as I'm concerned as to what might happen if my private data is leaked my accident or otherwise."

(Potential Employer considers this to be a different but thoughtful approach to remaining social and the interview progresses as normal...)

Really easy for you to say when you have not been on unemployment for over a year, your wife is about ready to leave you, your house is in foreclosure, repo guys are going to come take your car away, and the collection agencies you around the clock demanding you pay them back and harassing your family members.

In such a scenario is unfortunately, very typical in this economy for those who got laid off at the absolute worst time.

My God, you Americans really have a fucked up country. Just in case you weren't aware. I'm surprised there's anyone left who could be described as genuinely happy.

As per a YouTube Comment:

Autismï is a hell of a drug.

who said it would protect 'against internet evils,'

Seriously, who talks like that? Internet 'evils'? Ohhhhh! I've noticed the rhetoric from Iran, North Korea and other reclusive countries consistently sounds like it was made up by some hammy Z-grade Hollywood writer, rather than written by someone who wants to be, you know, taken seriously by the world.

Actually I don't care about what you say anymore. I was just glancing over at your previous comments to see if I was dealing with a nutbag, and I saw that in response to someone saying ""Medicaid and public universities both work fine", you replied "No, they don't."

In my country (Australia) we couldn't afford private health insurance so we relied on Medicare and the public health system. We also have predominately public unis although there are some private ones, but once again due to lack of funds I went to a public uni like most other people. I turned out alright and now have a great hardware engineering job. So as far as I'm concerned you can fuck off, because you clearly don't know anything.

I feel happy knowing I don't have to keep debating with a stranger when he's actually quite stupid and in the clouds. :)

After all, for most software the major part of the value comes from all the other lemmings.

Belittling people who see value in purchasing non-free software just makes you look like an arrogant ass. There's nothing wrong with a balanced middle-of-the-road approach.