I take it we're all eagerly awaiting the newest IBM fiasco?

Given the choice between MSFT and IBM on the desktop, I'll go with MSFT every single time. In 1994 and 1995 I worked for a Fortune 100 company (manufacturing Tier 1 supplier to automotive) and we were evaluating Warp. Then I got a Gold release of Windows 95. None of the 3rd party vendors we depended on - that's NOT ONE - had any plans to support Warp. They all already were working on products for Windows 95 and what was to become NT4.

We had a few fans of Warp in the IT department, but the engineering department was solidly backing MSFT (we were still mostly DOS back then, but did have one OS/2 HMI running [sporadically]. Later, of course, that box was replaced with an NT4 box).

The point is, IBM lost the software wars and for good reason. Why anyone would expect anything from IBM other than disappointment is beyond me.

Insanity is doing the same things over and over again while expecting different results.

I'm sure Blue Linux will have its 0.25% market penetration and its small number of zealots. But if MSFT is ever going to be dethroned as King of the Desktop, don't look to IBM to accomplish it. Been there, tried that, failed miserably.

(Disclaimer: Perhaps my experience with DB2 UDB for Linux (version 8) has intensified the bad taste in my mouth from IBM. The product shipped with the slight bug of not being able to compile stored procedures. That is typical of my experience with anything coming out of a Big Blue box).

MSFT on the desktop is not dying anywhere in the US. And that's where I live. It might croak, but it isn't going to be on account of anything IBM does I assure you.