This is my baby. 650€ ($851) is a lot of money, but I still love it.

I love Windows Vista... and I really want another Windows Mobile phone... my old one was awsome, but met up with a glass of ice water... the ice water won

I used to sell mobile phones for about 2 years while I was in college. During the time I had or tried most of the major brands. From user experience it seemed like we had more issues with the Windows Mobile users than anything else. A lot of people didn't know about task manager and had lots of apps running which caused phones to operate slow. Random crashes and other software problems were also the norm. The new phones from HTC & Sony are nice but they just seem to put a pretty shell on top of an overall subpar OS. I will say 6.1 has improved quite a bit and the phones are getting better as time goes on.

Blackberry's by far seemed to be the most reliable and had the highest user satisfaction of any of the Smartphones we sold. Palm marketshare has pretty much evaporated completely and Symbian phones aren't found a whole lot in the US so no real experience with those.

I hate Windows (and use primarily Linux).

Windows Mobile is an extension of that, perpetuating the desktop monopoly by introducing proprietary and broken standards like MS Office formats, WinAPI, .NET, Internet Explorer, DirectX, etc. The OS itself may not be that bad, but what it represents I despise. The same applies to the Xbox family and all other MS products - they exist (often at a loss) to make Windows unfairly dominate.

I prefer mobile Linux, and I think the best chance for this is Google's Android.

I would love an LG Dare with Android on it.

And the "all real PC users" part of my last comment was a joke.

@Soleron

You'll probably be excited to hear that Android went completely open source then :)

Hopefully it'll catch on with the mass market now. I would love to see a highly supported system that isn't so closed off hardware/software wise (ie: iPhone)

I can tell you why a lot of people don't like windows.

1) Cost: Windows XP Home right now costs 139.95 at my store. Vista costs more. Linux is free.
2) Stability: Windows runs on a lot of different hardware, tending to make it unstable. Macintosh runs on Mac hardware, making it more stable.
3) Security: The opposite of security is accesability. Windows is made to be easily accessable, making it the preferred choice for people who want an easy OS. Linux is made to be secure, causing it to have a higher learning curve.
4) Viruses: Besides the security statement above, Macintosh naturally gets less viruses because of the way it is made and its small user base. Linux is more secure than windows, and has a smaller user base.
5) No DRM: I don't know if that is the right term, but MacOS has no CD key or activation. They don't need to have one, their OS only works on their hardware. Linux of course is free. I have had at least one time working as a computer tech to where a legitimate legal license of windows would not activate. Microsoft told me to call HP, and HP said it would cost 50$ for a new key.
6) Vista: Vista is a step backwards for Microsoft. Windows XP is more stable, runs faster and is easier to work on. Also viruses do less damage, people are more familiar with it, does not have the massive incompatability issues Vista does, and does not have Vista's annoying and innefective UAC controls. On the plus side, Vista looks pretty. Many XP users see no need to upgrade to Vista, and do not appreciate it being shoved down their throats on new computers. Many analists are comparing Vista to Windows ME (bad) and Microsoft keeps extending the XP support deadline and keeps pushing the release of Windows 7 forward.
To be fair, MacOS X is incompatible with previous Mac OS. However, they provide a better virtual system for running old programs, and MacOS X is worth it. Vista is not.

And I know I'm going to get labeled "nerd/geek" for this soon. That's fine, I work on computers for a living.

I'd add

7) Lack of Standardisation. Linux and Mac OS X applications tend to be more consistent with each other and the desktop, whereas most Windows devs reinvent the wheel or go crazy with colours and buttons. Even MS don't stick to their own interface guidelines for their Vista apps - look at WMP vs. WMM vs. IE vs. Office 2007.

and

8) Lack of Preinstalled Functionality. Vista doesn't come with an office suite, a serious graphics editor, a media format conversion tool, Flash*, Java*, a personal organiser, or an IM client. Linux has all of these things preinstalled, and I think Mac OS X has most of them.

As the big things that affect ordinary users.

 I REALLY want one of those. They don't even have a UK release set yet.

There are a lot of other reasons than what I listed.  I agree with these two.