>>Let's see what happened if Linux controls most of the Server/Desktop OS arena.
>
>Allow me take my Microsoft hat for a moment and replace it with my ex-Unix sysadmin/geek hat: that is not going to happen anytime soon. On the server side, you still have to be a geek to get this stuff to work. OTOH, I could toss a Windows 2000 Server disk at my AOL-using sister, and she could get it up and running in an afternoon. Desktop? Umm, yeah, right. I can barely set this stuff up, let alone Aunt Mable.
>
>And before you dismiss me as a Microsoft shill, let me say that I want Linux to succeed. Got to keep Microsoft's feet to the fire and all, you know. But as I see it, it's not going to happen anytime soon. And deep down, I'm a big fan of Unix (how many of you were on the FP Unix beta? :-)

Windows OS are friendly in an end-user standpoint but they're not stable enough. We replaced W2K with Linux for our Internet Server because the first is slow. It eats up a lot of PC resources where Linux is not. But true, you have to have people who are technically capable of setting Linux which are rare to find before, but yearly statistics shows that the numbers are significantly increasing.