I cannot claim to have come up with this metaphor, but i no longer remember where i heard it so i cannot cite the original author.
Anyway, here it is. Imagine a crowded highway (representing the world of computing). On this highway are many cars (which are windows computers) and more than a few motorcycles (which are linux computers). You are driving one of the cars. At one point you had to learn to drive the car, but now it comes so naturally to you that you have come to equate the motions of driving a car to those required to move any kind of powered vehicle. Most of the time, you drive happily in your car, but when you get stuck in traffic, you look at all those motorcycles zipping between lanes (not to mention their lower fuel consumption) with a bit of jealousy. So, you go out and buy a motorcycle.
Armed with your years of experience driving cars, you hop on this motorcycle without learning to drive it, and find yourself unable to get it moving. Indeed, without leaning to drive all over again (which is really neither harder nor more time consuming than learning to drive a car was, you just have to be willing do it), the bike is hard to drive, so you complain that it should have wheel and gas, brake, and clutch pedals like in your old car. You notice that in the winter, you get cold on your motorcycle, so rather than aquire the proper clothing, you complain that it should have a heatable shell, like your old car. Then you conclude that two wheels just are not stable and safe enough; it should balance properly on four wheels. If you got all these wishes, of course, you would be driving a car, still stuck in traffic and burning gas, and those benefits you saw in driving a motorcycle just vanished with the disadvantages.
So, the more you complain about GNU/Linux being different to use, not having those familiar microsoft-based applications, not being able to just pick up and install stuff from any-old-where like you did windows, think about the car and the motorcycle, and what those complaints would sound like to a motorcyclist. GNU/Linux distros were designed by some very smart professionals to be the way it is for a reason. If you were to make GNU/Linux work like windows, you would have all the same disadvantages that you get in windows without the advantages of GNU/Linux. True, GNU/Linux has some disadvantages vis-a-vis windows, such microsofts's ability to include proprietary drivers and codecs in its default install, or the massive amount of games written for its system. However, windows has many disadvantages vis-a-vis GNU/Linux as well, prime among these being security, stability, privacy, and freedom.
The point is, before you start complaining about GNU/Linux, it might be wise to learn how to use it first. Then at least your complaints will be reasoned, germain, and true.
If you need help learning to use it, just ask... there are plenty of people who will try to help you and not ask anything in return.
Also, please understand that nobody is trying to replace windows with GNU/Linux any more than to replace cars with motorcycles. There are so many complaints out there that begin "How does linux expect to replace windows unless..." Most in the GNU/Linux community are perfectly happy to coexist with windows; it is a very good end user system and if you are happy with it, good for you. It is not about winning or losing. GNU/Linux is about the idea that the open source model is a viable development model and it might be better than the closed source one in the long run. If proprietary software turns out to be better a better development model and everybody abandons GNU/Linux, so be it. We in the GNU/Linux community do not believe this right now (obviously), but only time will tell.
And if what you are looking for is windows without viruses and spyware, buy a mac.

Chowhound
Comic Vine
GameFAQs
GameSpot
Giant Bomb
TechRepublic