You are going to buy a high powered PC but not get a huge amount of the best games on the PC and miss out on all the bargains? Like PvZ for $5 today?

This is amusing. Are you referring to SecuROM et al? What differentiates them from Steam? They accomplish the same end, and do so in similar ways. The only means through which they are different is how they inform the user and the memory consumed during gameplay (Steam is upfront about it, with its client, but it consumes more memory as it must be launched to play any Steam games).
Honestly, today's "evil DRM" is no better or worse than Steam, which is a DRM platform. StarForce was terrible, but publishers have abandoned it.

If you can honestly say that Steam = SecuROM et al and that the only means through which they are different is how they inform the user and the memory consumed during gameplay then you sir are an imbecile (and I don't really care if I get banned).
Saying that a digital distribution platform (storefront, IM client, community functionality - groups, event scheduling, statistics tracking) which also incorporates a form of DRM or another is the same thing as the pure DRM software that provides just that, digital rights management is a sign of either some form of sever intellectual malfunction, stupidity, bad will or a combination of those traits.
In the end I should just follow the advice of Randall Munroe.

So, if I defecate on a plate and then pour cream on it, would you eat it?

I think you completely missed my point.

Ah, insults. Always an indication of a frustrated argument.
Here's something to consider: SecuROM doesn't force you to run a storefront, IM client, and community in order to play your games. Steam does. Could you perhaps consider that not everyone wants these functions? Steam forces users to run them. SecuROM is Steam without the filler, basically.
(Thanks for calling me stupid though, I enjoy the rage.)

Please explain then, as I thought you were arguing that Steam is better than other DRM schemes that does not include the community functions. DRM + nifty stuff that customers actually might want, or just DRM - crap on a plate with or without cream. Seems like a reasonable comparison to me.
Sure, the one with cream might tell you "this is crap on a plate", while the other one does not. They're both the same meal though.

I was arguing that Steam is not merely just DRM as melchiz said in his post but offers additional functions.
If those functions provide any value to the user is his choice to decide. And if I had only the options of crap on a plate and crap on a plate WITH cream I'd take the cream, might improve the taste a little. You?

But by adding those elements you yourself just mentioned (storefront, IM, community), regardless of the value perceived by the user (because that is purely subjective) you admit that Steam is not just DRM as you have implied in your previous post.

See that bolded only? You can't skip or else the conversation would be meaningless.
Let's just agree to disagree as this will take us nowhere.

Not as in choosing another meal (that does not exist), but as in not taking a meal at all. That option always does exist (by my reasoning), though you might not get any of the benefits of choosing a meal.
I want to play a game, and the only options are one with steam, and one with securom.
I'm being tortured but have the option to go free, for eating the plate with just crap I get a few things to take with me, if I chose the plate with cream as well I get other things (probably of lesser use).
In the first case I might also chose to NOT play a game (I don't get the benefit from accepting a DRM scheme), and in the second case I might chose rather to die (not getting the benefit [of continued life] from choosing to eat crap).

Sure. My car is a stereo, my shower is a steam room, my lawn mower is a composter, and my light bulb is a heat source. This thread is not about the wonderful community features of Steam, as they are secondary to the concerns of a community such as GoG: DRM/digital content rights.
You can argue that Steam is useful for Alienware customers, since, you know, they would appreciate a communications system for gamers. However, Xfire is a superior alternative for that end, so why not use the better in-game social client? Oh, because it's not about the community. Valve's goal is akin to AOL's during the 90s: lock people into the system as early as possible, so they cannot move to a competitor without serious grief.
Because Steam forces its client on customers, users wishing to migrate to a competing digital store will find it difficult, since, in order to play their old games, these customers will need to run Steam. Why use anything other than Steam if Valve locks us in? That's the issue with Steam. Valve uses questionable tactics to discourage users from moving away from Steam, and therefore is not deserving of praise in comparison to the likes of SecuROM.

screwed up the quote again, Anyways . I just wanted to say the patronizing "I am remaing calm and mature compared to you therefore I am winning this argument" type replies are super lame.
I guess that's gonna be followed with another "AHHH INSULTS blah blah blah blah" reply.

Ad hominem is a logical fallacy. Thus, those who avoid the temptation of personal attacks are more likely to create logically-sound arguments.
Do you disagree?

I don't think you understand what an ad hominem attack is and why it is a logical fallacy