Here's an interesting analogy: It's just possible that Linux could be to the
OS what the PC was to the mainframe and mini-computer. Being an old fart in
the computer biz, I got to see the entire evolution of the PC to where it is
now (I started out using DEC-11's & VAX's). Clearly, there were three things
that made the PC successful: it was an open architecture, i.e. the technical
specifications were published, no licensing was required (this was a
strategic error on the part of IBM; they didn't think there was a market for
it,)  and finally, it was a standard by virtue of having been designed by
IBM. Hardware developers could compete because the parts were
interchangeable and there were no royalties to be paid. Linux seems to have
those three things going for it. The same forces that made people want to
get away from DEC and IBM now apply to Microsoft, i.e. they were huge and
rapacious, and tried at every opportunity to make users dependent on them.
In the early years of the PC, PC users was perceived as being just as geeky
as Linux users are now. Microsoft became the PC OS because it was run by
geeks. It still is run by geeks, but now they're old and rich geeks. When
most of the people who develop linux and its components and applications can
make money at it, Linux will displace Windows. As long as most people do it
for fun, it will not. That darn GPL sort of gets in the way of making money
though, doesn't it?
--
Phil Mattison
Ohmikron Corp.
480-722-9595 ext.1
602-820-9452 Mobile