Corrections (some may already be caught):

Your "its" and "it's" look good ;-)

\r\n  - Paragraph begining "Microsoft's declared 'Enemy #1'..." -- would be\r\n    a good place to reference your businesses using GNU/Linux page.\r\n\r\n  - "...many strong enterprise product like eDirectory..." \r\n    s/like/such as/\r\n\r\n\r\n  - "...worldwide sales, dealer and support network."  \r\n    s/dealer and/dealer, and"\r\n\r\n  - Globally:  s/Novel/Novell/\r\n\r\n  - "...and of Linux enthusiasts has..." \r\n    s/enthusiasts/enthusiasts,/\r\n\r\n    In the same paragraph -- you _might_ mention that RH is explicitly\r\n    targeting Sun with this move, though that could be taken as\r\n    off-message.\r\n\r\n  - "...can run thousands of iterations of Linux..."\r\n    I'd use "instances" for "iterations".  Unless they're looping ;-)\r\n\r\n  - "...a new customers site..."\r\n    You want "customer" or "customer's", make up your mind.\r\n\r\n    Having watched system spawning on a zSeries at LWCE, spawn time is\r\n    closer to seconds than minutes, if a standard image is desired.\r\n\r\n    "relability relatively poor"\r\n    s/relatively //\r\n\r\n  - "...the company is totally schizophrenic..."\r\n    Style, but I'd:   s/totally //\r\n\r\n  - "...then they turns around..."\r\n    s/turns/turn/\r\n\r\n  - "They've contributed anti-Linux money to SCO Group too".\r\n    I'd write:  "They've financially supported The SCO Group's attacks\r\n    on Linux as well."\r\n\r\n    There's also the small matter of the full-page anti-IBM ad Sun had\r\n    ready to roll for Caldera/SCO's "revocation of IBM's AIX license"\r\n    announcement.\r\n\r\n  - "regardless of how many of its employees want to stay with Solaris"\r\n    Is it really Sun's employees who are dictating corporate policy\r\n    vis-a-vis GNU/Linux?\r\n\r\n  - Globally:  it's "The SCO Group".  Not "SCO" or "SCO Group".  My own\r\n    preferred formulation is "Caldera/SCO, pointing out that this is in\r\n    fact the 11 year old GNU/Linux company not fighting GNU/Linux.\r\n\r\n  - "...SCO Group's claims".  I'd use a pointed word -- pablum, lies, or\r\n    propoganda might all be appropriate.\r\n\r\n    As to who believes SCO, I see little evidence to suggest it's the\r\n    general investment community.  Short interest in Caldera\r\n\r\n  - "There has been no slowing of Linux adoption, in fact..."\r\n    s/,/;/\r\n\r\n    s/SCO/The SCO Group/\r\n\r\n  - "...but IBM thought so little..." \r\n     _I_ don't know what IBM thought\r\n    (or thinks) of Caldera/SCO's claims.  I'm not convinced IBM thought\r\n    little of them.  It's possible that IBM realizes it can bring down\r\n    the house of cards surrounding Microsoft, Canopy, Sun, BayStar, the\r\n    RBC, and other actors.  Or that IBM merely wants to head off\r\n    terrorism/blackmail (which Caldera/SCO's initial claims amounted\r\n    to).  Or something else.\r\n\r\n  - "...to Santa Cruz Operation..."\r\n    s/Santa Cruz Operation/the &/\r\n\r\n  - "SuSe"\r\n    s/SuSe/SuSE/\r\n\r\n  - "Microsoft is pouring millions..."\r\n    Groklaw had a really good commentary on the structure of revenues\r\n    required by Darl McBride's compensation plan.  Essentially, several\r\n    quarters of successive profits.  Which largely dictates financial\r\n    contributions required to keep the corpse afloat.\r\n\r\n  - "PHBs".  Inappropriate in this context.\r\n\r\n