OK, then, that ought to generate some traffic. *grin*
What I'm actually going to say here is why *I*, specifically, don't like old school games. I've come to several realizations of the underlying reasons why they don't appeal to me.
Source Material - When you read OSR blogs or listen to podcasts, the proponents often speak of capturing the essence of sword & sorcery classics such as Howard and Lieber. I realized a while ago (specifically, about halfway through the interview with James Raggi on RPG Circus) that part of my problem is that I don't like Howard and Lieber. I've tried several times to get into them, and get bored every time. My inspirations are Burroughs and Lester Dent, Dumas and Sabatini, and, of course, modern epic fantasy like Pern and Melanie Rawn. Once I understood that I wasn't interested in telling the same type of stories as the OSR, I became a lot more comfortable with the idea that I didn't need to enjoy their games.
Random Death - Many proponents of OSR point to modern games as being all namby-pamby with their protection of characters. They want to save versus death, damn it! And surviving an adventure only has any meaning if you could have died at any turn! No risk, no reward! I simply don't buy into that mentality. I don't want my guy to be a hero because he was able to avoid dying. I want my guy to be a hero because he makes tough choices and stands up for what's right. I want to tell (and discover) his story, not just the random series of things that happen to him. As such, I really don't like random death. Been there, done that, have the chair reserved on the banks of the Styx to show for it. (Seriously, one of my characters does.) I'm not all about protecting my precious snowflake of a character. I want risk, and even death. But, I want it to be interesting and meaningful, not just a matter of a simple failed save.
Player Skill - One thing I find fascinating in browsing OSR discussions is comparing the oft-repeated refrains of "modern D&D is just a video/board game" and "old school gaming is about testing the skill of the player, not the stats of the character." To me, video and board games are all about testing the player. The character is largely irrelevant. But, maybe I'm misunderstanding. Or, more likely, it's not actually the same people making both statements. Regardless, I want my character to be more than a window into a different world. I'm looking to explore what it's like to live and succeed as someone else. If I just wanted to find out if I could outwit/outlast the DM, I'd stick to chess or wargaming.
Exploration - Okay, this one I'm actually very sympathetic on. Exploring the world is cool. But, honestly, I'd much rather interact with people than environments. I'd certainly play in a sandbox-y game of finding out what's just beyond the edges of civilization. It just wouldn't be my first choice.
Fantasy - And we'll end on one that's 100% personal taste, and quite possibly a temporary situation. I am bored to death of fantasy games, particularly in a medieval setting. I want to at least move to a Renaissance-style swashbuckling game (7th Sea or Swashbucklers of the 7 Skies). More ideally, I want to play urban fantasy (DFRPG) or post-apocalyptic goodness (Gamma World). While you can play old school in a world with guns, it's pretty far removed from the assumed setting.
So, those are the reasons that I think old school gaming
In other words, guys, it's not you. It's me.