So, why exactly is the parent comment moderated as a "troll?" It only points out the obvious! Oh, wait, it's the mock sarcasm, that must be it. Although, perhaps the author genuinely felt that this "sophisticated" tech audience, that delights in ripping apart knee-jerk statements/policies on other topics, would so easily join the herd on this ridiculous topic.

Upon reading the summary, my first thought was writing "Oh no! The Chinese! The Chinese! Protect your wives and daughters against the Chinese!" What a bunch of nonsense.

American corporations have been making and selling computer software for decades -- how many here are worried about government bugs in that software? Should the Chinese buy US made software? How about the Russians, or anyone else? How is it that Windows has 90% percent market share all over the world and governments are not screaming to have it removed? Talk about an opportunity to install secret access! And, if we assume the US government *has* been installing secret bits into US made software, what makes the US (from a foreigner's perspective) any better than China?

And the most amusing thing about this is that it was the US that pushed, and pushed hard, to open China to US trade. When Nixon made his trip to China, it was historic. So, after opening Pandora's Box, the US desperately wants to close it. Got it. Nothing shows decline like trading confidence for fear.

That's right, the Chinese are coming to get you. And you know what, you are so stupid (look at your education system!) that you wouldn't even be able to figure it out! That's what this story indicates to me. Forget actually having the knowledge and integrity to prove something, we'll just go on accusations. After all, everyone knows Linux is made by/for Communists and is anti-American. It's also full of security holes and opens the user up to all sorts of expensive lawsuits because those Linux Commies stole code from the good, America loving, closed-source corporations that only have the end user's best interests in mind when creating exceptional software.

I don't believe your view is that unpopular, nor unreasonable. The problem is always in the details. So, let me ask you this, let's suppose you were told your Comcast cap is 25GB per month (that's for $44.95/month), and you have to pay $1/GB over that. Would you be happy with that level of service? I ask because that is what my ISP told me I will now start getting. I am *not* happy with that, even though I have *never* used more than 60GB in one month.

Now, let's say my ISP told me I would get 60GB for $29.95 and then have to pay $0.20/GB over that. Would I be upset? No. I would be happy to get a plan like that. Others may feel that is still too little and the cost too high. So, where do we set the pricing?

Have you ever heard of something called "jobs?" Yes, The US trades with other countries and provides access to the domestic market for products from other countries. Like it, or not, there is also a lot of politics involved in allowing/denying trade. One (example) of the most notorious of the recent past/present has to do with Canadian lumber entering the US. The US firms that were/are being undersold protested furiously to the US government, which established various trade barriers to Canadian lumber entering the US market -- which (surprise!) costs Canadian jobs. The US government basically said: go ahead and take us to international court. Canada did, and won, and the US did nothing because the international court has no power to actually make the US do anything. So, the Canadian government worked the "back channels," making deals with US politicians that eventually resulted in an agreement. An agreement that was still bad for Canada, but better than nothing. And that means some Canadian jobs were saved and the politicians can take that to the voters the next time there is an election.

There is no "ideal" world that is governed by concrete and un-alterable laws. We are people and are governed by people -- people with biases and differences of opinion. That is life -- get used to it. There is no universal fairness to all. Never has been. In the lumber debate, if you are an American, would you rather the US government told US firms to shove it, and cost hundreds, or thousands of jobs? Yeah, it ain't so cut and dry. Someone is going to lose their job and not be able to provide for their family. Depending on which side of the border you are on it is always easier to accept the "other" guy losing his job, not you.

The US is still a huge, fat market (pun intended). Others want access to that market and will bend under US pressure in the hope of gaining/retaining access.

I haven't read the article (shocker!), but really, why would I want to? It is funny how people just don't seem to read/follow what has already been said. Just a little while ago there was an article posted here which discussed why Apple is so successful -- because they constantly invest in that "new thing" that will "disrupt" the existing order and even destroy the market for their older products. So, why can Apple make this work, but MS/Intel can't?

You want to invest in new things, even at the expense of your own, older, offerings because there is a need. Consumers want these things and you better respond. Many people now want lower power processors (just like they want fuel efficient vehicles), an OS that is less bloated than Windows, portable computing, etc.

The near-term future is not going to give us flying cars, or jetpacks, but it is obvious that it will give us ubiquitous computing. We are never going to be without a computer. We will have them in our pockets, or on our wrists, or on belt clips. We will use them for more and more of our daily tasks. And we will leave our desktops behind, except for specialized, dedicated tasks. Such tasks might include programming and photo editing and writing/composing -- things that require time and focus. But, for more and more of our computing needs, tablets and phones and whatever else comes about will be just fine.

You can't tell me MS/Intel can't see this.

You said that better than I could, and I agree with you. Tellingly, your comments regarding virtualization bear out precisely what is happening in my organization today.

Yes there are.

They sell to companies run by older, conservative managers, such as banks and other established companies (think essential service providers, for example). These people still think Linux is some crazy, unproven, security hole ridden toy not ready for the enterprise. Many of them have not kept up with tech for 30 years and believe anything they are told by salespeople. Oh, and many of them hate IBM (the good old days, you know).

I've tried to move my company away from Sun hardware and was shot down every time.

Not really. Larry "dial an intern" Ellison hires another guy who tried to get some on the side, big deal. The article (on Slashdot, no less) dealing with the HP/Hurd issue led me to a story about executives and how often they were removed from their position due to sex scandals. Interesting read. Larry has had quite a few liaisons of his own.

I don't mean to get into an argument, but Saint Ansel used something different even when he was alive. He switched from large format to medium format (various cameras, I believe). He would be using what suited his needs, if he were to be around today -- including digital. From what I have read about him, he was very enthusiastic about new photographic technologies.

Believe it, or not, a not so long time ago (like, oh maybe 2 years ago) there was a "news" story broadcast on US TV about a young woman who bought a Dell. She was a university student and was somehow "convinced" by a Dell sales rep (over the phone) that she should get Ubuntu. The news anchors could not even pronounce Ubuntu (and joked about the crazy name) and the story ran as one of those "big company screws consumer and won't fix the problem" issues. They made Dell look pretty bad. So, I am not surprised that Dell is coming out with this sort of information. They are tired of stupid people deciding to get Ubuntu and then demanding Dell give them Windows free of charge to "fix" the computer.

Went to a Windows presentation and found out that Server 2008 has exactly this feature. So, yes, you can install a 2008 server with no GUI. Will still cost you money, of course.