> Let's see if I can put this in writing without rambling too much.
> 

Some very well thought out arguments there, Alan.  Very Good.

Linux still faces quite an uphill battle though.  Even though it is the
most logical choice, there is an emotional component too.

When I worked of the City of Phoenix PD, the System Admin staff were all
members of the Church of Microsoft.  We re-booted at least one of the
various servers at least once a week.  Still, they refused to even
consider moving to Linux.  The reason?  Well the most quoted line was
with all the developers Linux has, its impossible to tell who might have
slipped in a back door and we could not afford to have our data
compromised.  And they owned stock in Microsoft.  So when they pushed to
update the servers to Server 2000 and to change over 1000 desktops to
Windows 2000 at some huge cost, who's interest were they looking out
for?  The company they owned stock in made money, and so they made money
too.  They didn't have to learn any new skills to support the software
and they were more needed than ever.

Much of the city has converted to Unix.  When I left, I think the Police
Department was about the only department running a Microsoft shop.  But
they refuse to change over and as long as that crew stays there, that is
the way it will stay.

I'm sure that its not the only IT department that feels that way.  The
staff has a lot invested in learning Microsoft and may even own stock in
MS.  Logical arguments mean nothing to them.  They are loyal members of
the Church and live on the faith that Microsoft will put out a patch to
fix the latest problem.

No matter how many times they re-boot the server or how many virus
infections they get, they will stick with Microsoft because it is what
they know.  Better to live in a known hell than an unknown paradise.

I don't know what can be done to win over such people.  I'm not sure
anything ever will.  Linux advocates just have to wait until they die or
retire and newer people move in with different ideas.


Devin