There was never a name change from UNIX to LINUX. UNIX lives on but is comercial software and I think alwasy has been. It was named afer it's author, Linus Torvalds. To quote him:

Linux is a Unix-like operating system, but not a version of Unix. This gives Linux a different heritage than, for example, Free BSD. What I mean is this: the creators of Free BSD started with the source code to Berkeley Unix, and their kernel is directly descended from that source code. So Free BSD is a version of Unix; it's in the Unix family tree. Linux, on the other hand, aims to provide an interface that is compatible with Unix, but the kernel was written from scratch, without reference to Unix source code. So Linux itself is not a port of Unix. It's a new operating system

Linux is still not easy to use but great steps have been made in improving its ease of use and installation, most notably in the commercial distributions such as Red Hat and Mandrake. More recent versions will often install without the hassle of having to tell the system what hardware you have (and having to have a fair knowledge of some hardware) and there is some plug and display support.

Software can often be installed using RPMs, often with graphical interfaces to assist with managment; other graphical interfaces exist to assist with other system tasks. All in all, it is moving slowly but surely to a point where I believe carrying out these tasks will be as easy as in Windows, perhaps in some cases easier than Windows.

There is some satisfaction to be had from being "different" from "the herd." Been there. Done that. Bought the T-shirt.
Now that I've learned that I am not likely to significantly advance the state of computing arts with my efforts, I'd rather just
get some work done in the fields I know and enjoy. Windows works fine for me.

I suppose that is one way of looking at it but it is not mine. Mine is that I believe in the software and I believe that as more interest in making Linux easier for home users develops, the software will become more and more viable as an alternative to Windows.

Maybe I'll be proved wrong but I'd rather invest a little time in such developments and the longer term prospect of free/cheap reliable software than invest $1,000s in new MS products.