@Rich Turner
I think you are confusing encryption and DRM. These things are not the same.
You state that DRM is useful in a corporate setting. I highly doubt that. Encryption is though, as is controlling who accesses what on a server, but DRM does not serve in either function.
You state that DRM is used in the (Windows) OS to protect private data. That is not true either, once again it is encryption that is used for that purpose - and rather feeble encryption at that, given the ease with which hackers and other scum are able to pry the data they want from OS weaknesses.
DRM is used only where media is concerned. DRM is what downgrades a signal from movie file to screen if Vista is not 100% sure that everything is fine and dandy throughout the chain. DRM is what prevents you from installing that brand-new game you just bought, because the stupid protection cannot even recognize its own official disk. DRM is why Vista had so much trouble deleting files and transmitting files across the network, because each byte was being checked in case it was a pirated byte - and since the system had no chance in Hell of knowing, the whole thing was hopelessly bogged down.
In short, encryption and controlled access have all the virtues you mistakenly attribute to DRM, whilst DRM has only one : to royally piss of any honest customer (whereas pirates, ironically, are plague-free and can do as they wish).
I refuse DRM the right to exist on my computer. I do not have Vista, and if Vista II is the same turd, it will not do any better in my house. I do not play Spore and I refuse to buy any EA game until they abandon the practice. I have stopped buying music ten years ago, when all this nonsense started, and the only music I listen to is what I have in my existing CD collection. I have enough to do in my life without kowtowing to outrageous demands from organizations that act with an authority no one has given them.
Life has enough restrictions as is, I will not be imposed more in my leisure activities.