Windows 7 Unveiled & Released To Developers

Huh. Yay for yet another Windows vs. Unix debate.

"IF you can convince the Linux community that there is a problem with their software (difficult given their innate arrogance), then they MIGHT get around to doing something about it EVENTUALLY, but more often than not they'll just say that it was not the purpose of their software and they provide it as-is (so screw you, effectively: if you can do better then write it yourself - not an attitude that wins consumers' hearts)."
That's pure idiocy. First of all, it is a generalization: only immature open source projects haven't yet found the right balance between accepting user feedback and keeping a solid code base. And second, it's actually the other way around: try having Microsoft change something after a request of yours. Isn't it _much_ easier to contact an open source programmer and ask him/her what s/he thinks about implementing something, or paying a programmer to plain implement that feature for you and send it to the project leaders?

"I recently bought a second laptop with Vista installed because Ubuntu just does not support my important devices (TomTom Go 930 being a prime example)."
As if it was Microsoft who produced the TomTom drivers. Simply, the device producers don't always provide Linux drivers(but the situation in that regard is improving lately), whereas they're almost obligated to provide Windows ones.

"Vista IS secure (perhaps a little too so given the number of questions it asks), it is not bloated if you uninstall everything you don't need and the DRM is needed to stop people pirating the often innovative ideas that Microsoft have that let them earn money over their competitors so they can develop more software."
...Are you saying Microsoft needs more money? Not to be unpolite, but what the hell is wrong with you? Also: the few innovations Microsoft made are hugely offset by the innovations it stole or killed with its politics.

"The fact is that Linux will never become mainstream until it accepts that it must encourage the business sector by allowing them some proprietary code so they can differentiate themselves from their competitors, and working with them to keep their proprietary ideas safe rather than bashing them constantly. Proprietary ideas and IP are the life-blood of businesses and the reason that they can afford to employ so many people."
First of all: there is no single Linux community, so Linux itself can't encourage closed-source software(nor would it). There are however Linux-centered companies such as Red Hat or Novell who make huge money based on proprietary solutions running on Linux. As a matter of fact, Linux wins over Microsoft in many business-related fields, the most relevant one being servers: the internet, simply put, runs on Linux.
Second: software houses can develop whatever proprietary software they want. It can work on Linux. For instance: Skype, Doom 3, Cedega...
Third: have a good day, I hope you'll understand my positions, and sorry for any harsh words.