Because they think people will never need anymore than 5 activations... Or as I said, they are fucktards.

Good think I don't own any EA games anymore. The Spore retail DRM screwed over my computer.
If I want any in the future I'll just buy em from Steam.

I think opinions of EA will only change when we find out what their long-term DRM plans are. If they are going with a DRM-less or low-level DRM model, people may be less insulting towards them. I doubt the hatred will fade completely however, given all the other things EA has done.

Minimal DRM for Sims 3 (I suspect SecuROM will be still be used for disk protection and such, though). I am trying to be hopeful...

They're not helping, merely responding to all the flak concerning limited activations and DRM that may or may not comprimise one's computer. If the consumers hadn't raised a stink about the aforementioned issues, we wouldn't have the deactivation tools to begin with. IMHO, they deserve all the flak they get for their actions/policies.

We have a saying, "one swallow doesn't make a summer" which applies in this case. It does give you hope though, and I await their following releases to see if this is a general company position now.
Although my secondary point will stand, in which I was referring to the absorption and destruction of some of my favourite developers.

RIP Origin Studios
RIP Westwood

They join the legions of the abandoned, but never forgotten.

OH MAH GAWD!!! A publisher is listening to the community? Those bastards! Let's lynch them! Seriously, you are bitching because EA is clearly admitting that the world is not yet ready for that kind of DRM, and that they are trying to make things right? Bitch about them for stuff that is actually bad, otherwise you just sound like a crazy with a grudge (although, to be fair, every "real" gamer has a grudge against EA :p).
I am not going to suddenly offer to "love EA, long time", but don't complain when they do what everyone was asking for. While listening to the community has been bad in the past (see Tribes 2's ninety million patches :p), it shouldn't be something that should cause such animosity.

Well, it's complicated. It has been stated that no version of The Sims 3 will use SecuROM. The catch is that you must use the EA Download Manager to get any patches even if you buy the retail version; patches are always desirable (and in some cases necessary to even complete some aspects of a game), so the EA Download Manager has effectively become the DRM mechanism.
This lets them leave the "online activation required" notice off the box and means they don't have to include any sort of warning about the DRM being used. It also enables them to change the DRM system later on at their discretion; The Sims 2 did not initially use SecuROM either, but it was used for some later expansions.
EA will earn some brownie points for this ostensibly lighter DRM system and may well avoid the customer review backlash seen with Spore, but in fact they have ensured that they look like the good guys while maintaining full DRM control over their product.

Gross. Reading the EULA now..knew it was too good to be true..

I have just had an awful realisation...
What if games are released intentionally full of bugs, preventing piracy by forcing those wanting patches to have a registered version with the download manager?
Mind you, how could you tell? Buggy games have been released for years...

I wouldnt be surprised at all.

Conspiracy theory? Seems to be a valid one...