I took "offense" in the original letter because I'm very, very happy that indies are finally earning money for their efforts in a hassle free way. The thinking "I deserve a DRM free copy" is, imo, the same "out of touch" thinking many gamers charge big publishers with.
Then I invite you to read the letter again because I don't know how could I be most respectful to indies than what I wrote and I also don't know how I could be more clear that this is not an anti-Steam letter. I think your Steam-phobic-phobia has tricked you.
Mmhh, maybe I did jump the gun a little bit. There are a lot of "gaming hipsters" trolling around (not here, but in general), who thing the best time for gaming was the 80s (yes, I really read that). And if these people (preferably on their airbooks) complain that indie developers are "selling out" because they want to finally earn some money for their hard work, I'm getting angry. Maybe I'm like one of those old generals in the movies, who sees commies everywhere...
But I still think that Steam remains one of the best things that has happend to indie gaming (alongside the Humble Bundles).
I still consider Steam the "perfect" DRM for all the services it adds (autoupdates, cloud storage, "digital shelf" achievements), and the cons lose severence with each passing year. I guess it would be preferable if they used a DRM like GOG additionally (only account based downloading, DRM free games) so that gamers like you could enjoy their games.
Once GOG will have a client (an inevitable move, imo) they will probably still use both (as they can't forcefully tie their games to such a client). This might result in some interesting behavioral data.