Evan,

>That rant is flawed for two reasons.
>1) It claims that Hitbox is software that runs on Windows Webservers. This is untrue because the software runs on the Hitbox server (whatever that is) and you are given some HTML to paste into your webpages. Therefore Hitbox can be used on any type of webserver from Mac to Linux to Windows.
>2) It claims that the sites that are monitored are of interest to Windows users. Once again untrue. The sites monitored are: "Cisco Systems, PlayStation (America), Inc., Alaska Airlines, Northwest Airlines, IDG.net, Sun Microsystems, and Brooks Brothers." which are on interest to any OS user.

Good points...but how's this for an argument that the initial 0.24 figure is flawed: they are only using Web Browser statistics, i.e. going by what percentage of users hit these sites with a certain OS flavor... I am a big Linux fan, but I will definitely admit that one thing is lacking in Linux...a decent, bug-free browser. I am still using Netscape 4.72 on my Linux machines at home, and there are lots of sites that don't even render properly (some are unusable).

This isn't a big deal for me, but imagine that I use Linux on my desktop but also want to be able to browse the web with the best browser (IE right now). I might re-boot into Windows and do my browsing, saving files and such on a shared folder that Linux can see. Then, re-boot into Linux and do whatever I want there. What would you call that desktop? Windows or Linux? THis analysis definitely says nothing about dual-boot machines (since MS OEM licensing agreements have made such a beast impossible to get other than by manual installation).

I am not saying Linux Doesn't have a small share. It is tiny, and that is fine by me. Windows has a lot of apps and development suites that Linux can't match for an average user. But don't take a single PC function and use that as the basis for what desktop is being run. What's next...a poll of MS Office users to show that Linux resides on 0.00% of all desktops?

Do you see my point?

JoeK