Open Source methodology has gained some ground in one of the last places you and I might expect: In the development area of corporations. Consultants are calling environments like Sourceforge Enterprise Edition a Digital Development Environment.

One large them of responses to the Thunderbird post is the question: Why can't Thunderbird and Firefox both prosper in the same development organization? Since there is money, what's the problem?

"In my last blog post about the real-world cost of Linux, I was struck by the contrast between my words and fellow InformationWeek blogger Alexander Wolfe’s take on all this."

"The fact that Microsoft has a majority market share in PC desktops is the biggest challenge facing the growth of Ubuntu and free software in general."

Despite fantastic advances with Desktop Linux as a collective whole, there still seems to be some hurdles that this Windows alternative has yet to overcome. In this piece, I’ll examine these from my own perspective, that of a full time Linux user.

I think that the reality is that for 99 percent of the people who buy and use products, it doesn’t. If you can’t read code, why would you care if you can? There is this central message of “freedom,” but it doesn’t really apply to a freedom that the average person identifies with. For instance, you are free to flap your arms and fly to the moon too, but if you can’t do it, so what?

Linux is not hard to use. Really. It's different to an extent. But not "hard" in the sense of not being user friendly. Linux is being made out to look hard, not only by those who never have used it yet seem to despise it, but also by those who use it on a daily basis and wouldn't use anything else.