>
>Also, I'd suspect that "gag reflex" is not everyone's reaction, else why would there be efforts underway to get Windows® applications running under Linux?

You're correct, it's not everyone's reaction. I would suspect most practical people (which includes most VFP developers) don't see Windows vs. Linux as a religious war.


>A company that adopts Linux over Windows® is not going to allow a gag reflex to get in the way of getting their business done, and many no doubt have substantial business processes employing Excel or Word.

When I said "gag reflex" I was speaking more of the techies than the business decision makers. I would suspect most Linux disciples would tell them to use OpenOffice or StarOffice rather than give "the evil empire" any more revenue.


>I noted in an announcement by AMD for the Opteron CPU that IBM announced a 64-bit DB2 for Linux. I don't know if they already have a DB2 for 32-bit Linux mind you.

To me that is the difference between Linux on the desktop vs. Linux as a server. I think Linux as a server instead of Windows 2000/2003 as a server is a great choice especially for small networks where the benefits of Active Directory are questionable. File & print sharing along with web serving is some of Linux's bread and butter. My main server is RedHat Linux running Samba and I have no problem getting Win2K, XP, and Win98 machines to talk to it. (Ironically I only have problems with a Linux workstation). And if you need databases you do have a good choice on Linux from low end to high end.


>Interesting, too, that MS has no legal problems with Office being run on Linux. I suppose that end-user products are different than developer products despite the fact that Office has lots of "development" capabilities too.

They just won't support it there (and I'm not arguing their right to not support it there, either). And as other messages in this thread have indicated the make sticking point seems to be the runtime.


>It's a crazy mixed-up world that badly needs some SIMPLIFICATION!

No argument there.

Roger