One important point resonates with me too, I'm afraid.
I love Linux, and FOSS, in principle. As a sysadmin, I've introduced ubuntu into the server rooms at the last three Windows shops I've worked in. I've subscribed to the newsletter and tasted the Kool-Aid.
However, I've been trying to switch to Ubuntu for desktop use since Breezy and always end up back at my Macs. I'm a (very) amateur photographer and while I don't think my needs are that specific or unusual, several pieces of proprietary software are quite important to me.
In my case it's Adobe CS, Lightroom, and some others. It'll be different apps for different people, but I'm sure I'm not alone in that situation. I need those to work seamlessly before Linux on the desktop is viable for me.
Sure, there's Wine, but it's too ugly. Sure, I could dual-boot or virtualize, but I don't want multiple desktops, and what's the point of abiding by some F/OSS principle only half the time?
Some of the problem, as I see it, is that a lot of the community prefers to bark, for example, that GIMP is a perfectly viable PS replacement when most power users understand that it clearly isn't.
I don't care how we get there - Linux binaries from the manufacturer would be fine with me - but I need my handful of apps working natively and properly before I can switch for keeps.