As soon as Steam OS releases, I will for the first time choose to use Linux. If I knew anything about Linux, I would all ready be using Steam OS. I had already made a decision to use Linux. But with the announcement of Steam OS, my plan was slightly delayed.
But my question is why would you want to use Linux? There is inherently nothing special about it, meaning everything it does Windows does, if not better. Now if you try to feed me that line of crap about it being "free", then that is where this conversation ends, and I no longer pay any attention to you. Windows is not expensive by any account, and just like the CPU is a working part that a pc that it cannot do without, so too can it not function without an OS. Perhaps Windows is a paid for option, but at least I know what I get with it when I buy it, I don't have to jump through hoops to get it to work. Granted Linux distributions have gotten better in this regard over the years, but its still a far cry from the ease of use it needs to be at. Following on from my CPU analogy, even if I was given a completely open source CPU for free (not that's actually possible), I would seriously question its stability for one, and its reliability amongst a host of other issues that come to mind. I am not so poor as to try and claim that Windows is expensive, because it is not. Perhaps for a student still living on mommy and daddy's pocket money, or a part timer that may be the case, but that scenario is rejected as a valid concern for that very reason. Windows used to be expensive, not anymore. This revelation of price had nothing to do with Linux per say, but the increased competition that Microsoft is experiencing, which is a good thing. However, Linux is an open source project, and like all open source projects, they remain in the realm of the minority as only a few will keep up with its rapid developments. Not a business, nor an average user, nor even an advanced user would put up with that for very long before growing tired of it. Linux is thus unsupported, and by that very nature, will remain in the minority. This is unless a large enough company decides to create its own paid for build and provide support and maintenance. Perhaps that will be Valve, but lets not forget that Steam OS is intended as a gaming platform, first and foremost, and while it may run applications beyond that, its main focus of development will be games.
No, think of that door you mentioned. Its not only closed, the hinges are rusted thus creating even more resistance in trying to open it.
Linux in its current open source form will never be a mainstream product, because even if a company does come along and release a custom version, it will be sure to make it so different as to make it as hard as possible for people to easily port applications to another free distribution to protect its investments in its product. A company wont support Linux if there is no profit in it for them. Also, I for one as a software developer shudder to think of the nightmare of compatibility problems that would emerge if there is no single standard to follow concerning an OS, if there are so many to support. That's why Linux has issues with compatibility even amongst its own distributions, whereas Windows is fairly forgiving amongst its various versions. Windows for the time being is the perfect gaming platform due to its versatility ad it doesn't hurt that its got basically every game and application going for it. So as long as Windows remains as affordable as it is, and Microsoft doesn't mess too much with the formula (The start screen is not a concern of mine) then I can see no reason to jump ship, but if that which I just mentioned were to change too drastically as to be unpleasant (I doubt Microsoft will do anything really major to harm its support base) then who knows...