I was going to agree with you, but then I went to NewsCorp's website, and can't find any reference to any tier-1 or tier-2 ISP there. Which one am I not seeing?

Well, Microsoft's gross income for 2008/09 was $58.4B US, IBM's was $103B, HP's was $118B, Oracle's was $23B, SAP's was $16B. That's $318B (admittedly it contains some hardware dollars). You've got to estimate that total is only a small percentage of the total software services marketplace - you know, all those ISVs and consultancies which install, maintain, and support the software sold by the big guys. $1 trillion = 1000 billion in the US. I'd say $1T US is probably underestimating things...

Just because "Linux is winning", it doesn't necessarily mean Sun or Microsoft are losing (although I'd love to see Balmer out on the street as a victim of the current downturn...). Inevitably, the economy will resume expansion. In that case, you don't necessarily replace one with another - you can add to the existing server base as you grow. Then you slowly retire the old systems. You are implying - perhaps unintentionally - that when a Linux system is installed, it replaces an existing Sun or MS server. That ain't nearly always the case...

Are they purposely referring to priority traffic as "time sensitive" as opposed to "delay sensitive" just to make the average joe think this is better? Don't get me wrong - as a network design engineer I'm all for prioritizing latency sensitive traffic like VoIP or streaming video. Just don't treat Cox's VoIP any better than Skype's or Vonages... This whole Net Neutrality thing is a bummer. I like the idea of democratizing traffic - but only of the same type. No way in hell should FTP or BitTorrent have the same priority as VoIP.

Here, let me fix that for ya:

Yes, but I'm sure that saying "MS Office 2007 will implement MSOOXML, which we've admitted may not be technically possible" will be enough to justify it's continued use.

Sorry, I forgot to include that little point in my previous posting. ECMA 376, which based on the OOXML which Office 2007 uses, is not ISO/IEC 29500. Why do you think MS will implement ODF before '29500? "Oh, let's do ODF first! It's harder to implement than OOXML - we can just whip that out when we feel like it!"