I think this company is going down a path thats really irrelevant. Its not the time that it takes windows to start up that will make people want to use Linux. The windows users that have the most trouble with windows are the ones that will have trouble with any technology that is out there. I should know. I've done tech support for years. Things like having to install drivers, viruses, and ad-ware cause most of the grief on the windows platform. But also that windows isn't as easy to use as everyone may believe.

The biggest barrier to entry for Linux right now I believe is the fact that hardware companies don't support it as well as they should. Compatibility with new hardware is the biggest pet peeve and the tweeking it takes to make hardware work is what drives some users batty. This is not to detract from the massive progress on this front. The next biggest issue is to have the software work well. Too often you install a package that has been put out and it isn't very usable due to some little issue. This isn't the case in every package but it happens enough to keep novice users away. Case in point Scribus. If anyone has tried to use this on ubuntu lately they will know the print function doesn't work very well. Documents on some printers are just not printed properly. This is annoying considering this is a desktop publishing package.

Another thing is the developers of open source should be to really go after new innovative functionality. They really want to push forward a perception that new technology shows up on open source first before windows in fact. Right now most of the advancements are under the hood. But flashy features that catch users attention will do more to promote open source then any other advancement.

hmmm... Its funny I think Ubuntu will run on your Macbook pro. And I bet you its allot easier to use too.

A single distro is not necessary. I think people here have made that clear. But I can say what is necessary is a standard base library file list so that people creating commercial software can release software without having to provide source code. Now I know that some of you will say they can release the source its better. But in some cases it is not. Especially if you have trade secrets you want to protect. Commercial vendors are never going to agree to releasing their source code. Something similar to install shield would be ideal. Something that detects the distro and provides the bindings to the correct libraries. Maybe even downloads the dependencies for you.

Well the short answer to this question is yes. OpenOffice does read MS Office files. There will be some problems with formatting but that is understandable due to the fact that the two programs have completely different architectures and handle things differently. Thats not to say that you should disqualify migrating because of it. The easiest time to migrate is when your company is still small. The overall money you will save by doing the change over now is well worth the switch. Free is Free. As the company grows thats money that it can put into doing what it does best.

Don't expect any change of technology to go without problems though. That almost never happens. But don't be afraid to use a technology just because there are problems switching because there are always problems. There are also problems with not switching. It all comes down to which risk you want to take.

Functionally, OpenOffice is every bit as feature rich as MS Office if not more. Its a better product in my view. But thats MYHO. You may want to make that decision on your own.