Linux on KXAM 130

The problem with the ms vs linux conversation is the fact that by taking
this approach, your effectively alienating those very people you want to
convince of the virtues of your chosen platform.<BR><BR>When I talk with
people about MS as a company (non-tech guys), their eyes tend to glaze
over. Even if I started into anti-consumer laws, anti-competitive
behavior, yada yada yada. They simply don't care. They know that their
Windows computer at their house can do everything they need (internet,
word processing, some games, etc..) and connecting to the Internet might
cause them to get a virus, popup ads, whatever -- but thats ok, because
they made an investment into antivirus software, popup blocker software,
etc.. and the more problems they have and the more $$$ they shell out, the
more tied into the operating system they are (escalation of
commitment).<BR><BR>By having&nbsp;a MS vs Linux debate, your message gets
across to these people as --&gt; "your stupid buying MS -- you made a HUGE
mistake HAHAHAHA&nbsp;Linux RoOOOlZ!!" As a result, these people take your
argument as a direct personal hit on their 'decision' and become defensive
("oh yah? well if MS sucks so much, why is there so much software out
there for it? why does everyone use it? why can't I use xyz on Linux?
etc..etc..etc..) <BR><BR>I tend to think that separating the two is much
more effective. Ie "Microsoft: The present and future" which will discuss
issues of DMCA, CBDTPA, UCITA, FUD generation, US vs MS findings of fact,
changes in EULA, future platform design changes that satisfy RIAA and
other entities, etc. <BR><BR>Then as a second separate discussion, "OSS:
What it means for you". This could discuss what open source software is,
what the entire Linux movement is about, what is available, what it looks
like, perhaps throw in a Knoppix plug so people can download it and try it
out (or perhaps even attempt to do some CD burning and distribute at
various computer stores, etc..) <BR><BR>By splitting the conversation, you
effectively are able to argue on the side of the consumer (ie MS might
have been ok, but look at what they are doing to cause you harm now!) but
not in such a way to make them defensive ('augh, Linux guy is attacking my
platform of 'choice'!').&nbsp; Also, it shows that Linux/OSS can stand on
its own. Does OSS REALLY need to be compared to MS? I tend to think that
as a platform, if it cannot stand on its own, then perhaps there should
be&nbsp;more work done in the community before trying to convert MS users.
Seriously. First impressions are very important. Knoppix is getting there
(whats better than popping in a CD and having a fully operational system?)
but I think there are still quite a few problems (too much stuff in menus,
default wallpaper too techie/busy, printer autoconfig, LAN auto detect,
etc..) <BR><BR>Of course, if a discussion topic is "ms vs linux" attempt
to demonstrate WHY linux is better (from an end-user perspective) instead
of taking a position of "use linux because MS is evil". <BR><BR>Having
said that, I plan on&nbsp;listening to the show to hear what you have to
say. :)<BR>