And while we're on the subject, there is no excuse for the incompatabilities between software or for the poor security of OS's. The technology shoud be far beyond that point. If the OS wasn't equipped with all sorts of ways for outsiders to get into your computer (for updates, etc.), most security problems would go away.

Incidently, these comments come from someone who has written a few million lines of code in fortran, visual basic, etc. and who started using PC's in the IBM DOS days.

I even loaded Ubuntu on all 3 of home computers and have not had one regret. I was scared at first, but my old computers came to life. Dell claims 30% netbooks are Ubuntu. I think Dell can count better than MS.

How many Apple netbooks sold at this time 0.

Our K-12 school system went to openoffice and saved over a million a yr in MS office royalties.

It is unrealistic to think that an enterprise can switch from Windows to Mac very easily. The business users do not care to know anything about the computers that they use every day, much less learn a new operating system no matter how simple.

Half the people in this IT study probably have no say in the actual deployment of said systems.

Open source is way too hard to support for large corporations to take seriously and Mac is too expensive.

Agreed. But then I'd expect a monopolistic corporate behemouth like MSFT to be arrogant and out of touch with "the little people" who use their products.

"MS knows most of its users are not smart enough to actually use the Windows OS effectively, so they attempt to make it VERY SIMPLE for the VERY SIMPLE MINDED LEMMINGS.

in doing so, they’ve only confused the S#^T out of the 99.99% of lemmings that use computers."

So, your argument is that:

1. MSFT believes its customers are extremely stupid.

2. MSFT responds by attempting to dumb-down their OS, but actually confuses their users, so fails miserably in the attempt.

Not exactly a ringing endorsement for the company or its products.