Actually I should have started this thread, I need exactly the same kind of therapy for similar reasons
So don't read this haakin.
For the last few months (mostly because I can't find a job as an open source programmer) I've been slowly losing faith in open source - so much so that at the worst times I've seriously considered dumping my linux desktops and switching back to full-time windows.
I'm writing from a slackware box. I stuck to it because when those worst times came I would think through the crap I'd have to deal with on windows (there's crap on any os, oncluding osx), and then I would remember that my decision to switch to linux in the first place was based mostly on technical merit (it actually
is better, overall, for me).
But I'm a programmer, I hate powerpoint-like things (my talks don't need the distraction), I very rarely use a word processor, etc. I guess for you haakin this reasoning won't work. For you
osx is the one that's better.
So I'd say this: your decision will be better for yourself and for all the players in the industry (both proprietary and open source) if you choose based on merit, and not on politics. For example, if you choose to do your presentations in keynote that will send a message to apple that they're doing things right, to microsoft and the open office community that they're not. Since you're already involved with open source communities you are more likely to be heard by the open office guys.
So my point is - switch to keynote and tell anyone who will listen that openoffice is crap because it can't do what you can do in keynote. That way you'll save time and promote change with open source. Promoting change in my opinion is more important than blindly swallawing whatever open source programmers through at you
Remember that when your peers look at you suffer while using an open source version of a program, that won't encourage them to switch
In fact that will likely do more damage than good.
First time I've been 
