I have a few reactions to the article.

I think this is a big one:
  Nearly every student agreed that "Linux needs to shake its
  image as the techie/programmer's OS", and that "Linux is
  seen as a geek's OS.  Programmers love it and that puts
  everyone else off."

If we wear our faded jeans and sandals to the presentation,
then the above point is driven home:  Linux is not for the
mainstream, and certainly not for the "shiny people".

Here's another:
  "The new XP licensing arrangements may result in many IT
  shops reassessing their allegiance to Microsoft. Coming
  on the heels of the recent economic downturn, this may
  hurt Microsoft to the benefit of Linux." 

I believe now that Linux might just conquer a good piece of
the Corporate Desktop for exactly that reason.  A coherent,
consistent Linux desktop could save a company many thousands
of dollars and get the job done just fine.  And then, guess
what?  People would learn Linux at work, as they learned the
Microsoft systems back in the Microsoft era.

... oh yeah, by the way ... we should speak respectfully of
the "traditional" Microsoft way of doing things, and we can
toss out phrases gently conveying that Linux is the next
emerging thing, what comes beyond Microsoft, but that of course
Microsoft will be around for a long time to come, just like
COBOL.  ;-)

NOTE:  No, I'm not really here to bash Microsoft, but you
can't talk about Linux desktops without making comparisons
with the "established tradition" and the "old assumptions".

He puts this one down as a Clanger:
  "... After all, Microsoft invented the GUI."

But in fact, Microsoft invented the commercially successful
GUI, by marketing and also by intensively optimizing its
performance.  Macs still have single-button mice, fer
gosh sakes, I keep reaching for that right-click menu when
I'm on a Mac!  Xerox failed to sell the GUI at all, because
the copier folks managed to grab all the attention away
from their computer folks.  Microsoft made the GUI happen HERE.
They made it smooth and cool, more so than any Linux GUI
I've seen so far.  So that is the GUI to beat.

Now, here's an important marketing issue:
  "A commonly-agreed upon GUI environment is needed."

If you're going to present GNU/Linux based systems as the next
solution, to a broad range of people, then you need to present
two conflicting messages, in this order:
 1. Here is the Linux package that can replace Windows.
 2. ...but you have lots of alternatives IF YOU WANT THEM.

Most people will not get to point #2.  So settle on a distro
that gives you the effect of a full office suite, installed
automatically with pretty good security as a default choice,
and a set of dummies-style books that tell people just how to
get their basic results from this system.  This you can sell
to venturesome individuals, but especially to companies that
can buy one disk and two days of your time and be free of
Redmond Tribute forever, for a couple dozen desktops.

That distro doesn't yet exist, does it?  If it does, it's the
one we should be pushing, no contest.  Of course we could
derive one and burn our own CDs.

Vic

alandd@mindspring.com wrote:
> Perceptions of the Linux OS Among Undergraduate System Administrators
> Posted on Tuesday, December 18, 2001 by Paul Barry 
> http://www.linuxjournal.com/article.php?sid=5650