Conclusions:
If Linux were the same as Microsoft Windows then it would BE Microsoft Windows. Thankfully, it is not and thus there is a choice. Linux CAN substitute for MS Windows on the desktop, but it will NOT suit everyone. Linux DOES provide all the environmental tools that MS Windows users are familiar with, although they are not identical and they offer a different look and feel as well as different features. That too gives rise to choice that the user has the ability and freedom to exercise.
Some say the Linux desktop is wonderful today, others are of the opinion that it needs to mature further. There are some legitimate barriers due to the inability to run certain ?essential? applications on Linux that are available for MS Windows. But there will always be someone who can find reason to object, no matter if the desktop platform is Linux or MS Windows.
No matter which way you analyze the responses, Linux is a contender for the business desktop. Users have every right to choose their desktop of choice. For the large organization the total cost of ownership will be a deciding issue, particularly in a tight economy.
The key battle for Linux is NOT primarily a technology issue today, it has much more to do with knowledge and acceptance. In many ways Linux is today where MS Windows 3.0 was in 1989 ? on the radar set, and climbing.
This a great pro Linux article, but author still is focusing mostly on the cost side that MS will never be able to compete.
Linux developers might want to learn from the Japanese automobile manufacture of quality control & price to compete against MS. Japanese cars from the 70s were design as cheap disposable, but it didn?t take over the market till the 80s due to high quality control & reliability (Honda Civic). There are cheap car such as the Citroen & the Lada that has been around just as long or longer than the Japanese car that hasn't gone anywhere even those the price is "cheap".
