Should not take the comment out of context.  Ozzie said open source was a threat to MS.  Open Source may not be a threat to those of us who use it, or are contemplating using it.  However, it is definitely a threat to MS as it can and often does produce much more bullet-proof software, or simply better quality software.  It is a threat to MS in that they stand to lose market share. 

If you think about it, MS has never been about creating quality software.  It creates, usually, software that is mediocre, not innovative, but is marketed as the next best thing since sliced bread.  And before anyone accuses me of being a Linux troll, I use MS software extensively.   Hence I can attest to its quality, or lack thereof!

I have to agree with comment 2, the  cost of some commercial software would limit my abilities just by taking a chunk out of my budget. By dumping alot of commercial software and going with open source alternatives we have saved over 3 grand on our latest upgrade alone, as a small business money is important.

Also i agree that software should reflect the users intrests more than the shareholders, after all were the ones shelling out often times thousands of dollars on software suites.

Open source software is on the rise -- the only barrier still standing between Linux and more wide spread home use is plug and play.

From what I read, it's getting better -- but once that final hurdle is jumped, Microsoft will see serious erosion in their market share.

I agree. Open source is an abomination. There is no responsibility to open source programmers and no one pushing them to make things right.

Everytime I have delved into the open source network it has been trash. Then I find an application that wasn't open source, costs $20, and it's heaven.

The open source community needs to get a job.

Our company has moved to 90% open source solutions and has been able to deliver more cost effective, value added, products to our clients in a more timely manner.

Word of mouth has overwhelmed us with inquiries/clients.

For those unable to deliver quality open source solutions, either because they are beholden, obstinate, or technically  incompetent, I can see why this would be seen as a threat.  However, for both clients and competent providers, this is a blessing.

Also, no more need to sit on hold for hours waiting for someone to tell us 'they're working on it, hold for another 15 minutes while they look into it,  or it's not their problem, call vendor X' - open source developers have been much more responsive than MSFT ever was.  And, frequently, having access to source code meant we didn't even need to go outside of our shop to provide solutions to customer requirements/needs.

an operating system should be a stand-alone platform devoid of advertising preference

as microsoft re-focuses on ad dollars, confidence in microsoft's operating systems will errode > this is the result of human nature > people will not trust microsoft as both advertiser and provider of operating systems

obviously microsoft management sees the future correctly > their greed is what powers open source and eventually market demand for a simple low-cost operating system will roll over microsoft

microsoft is in big trouble and nobody is really saying it > they can't be an advertising jack-boot while pretending to be a seller of clean trustworthy software > the two things are incompatable in people's minds

its about time microsoft's position, intentions and actions are closely scrutinised and punished where they are wrong. im sure they are in the wrong in quite a lot of places. they already been held for abusing their monopoly. the sad thing is that it still continues. its about time that sanity prevails, and the microsoft tax be done away with. we need alternatives, and it can happen only at the grassroots level. companies can be bought over by the evil giant.

Surely both Google and the rising generation of Open Source applications are threats to Microsoft?

In my experience both have shown to provide better, more user friendly applications than MS, and..

..despite the fact that every company sets out to make money, the next most important thing is what consumers think of their products right?

Therefore MS have serious competition..

I feel that MS folks just agitate the Open Source flag to diverse. I mean, they have many businesses not impacted by Open Source, and their value proposal (fully integrated backbone) in the IT field is not very challenged by the open source. Many Open Source solutions are enterprise ready (I've compiled a huge list on http://www.opensource-it.com/ ), but not as integrated as Microsoft ones. So yes they compete, but their value is very different and if you choose one, you would not choose the other one. What is very surprising to me is that we always oppose MS and Open Source. And Oracle? And IBM?  Open Source is a much bigger threats for these guys. Of course IBM managed to counter open source development, but they have much more too lose (like Oracle) than MS.