for something like 10 years. Perhaps proving that a stopped clock is still right twice a day.

However, I've been making the opposite argument to folks in the MS camp (I meet them everywhere these days).

I tell them:

Basically you have the only non-unix compatible OS left on the market with any kind of adoption rate. It has a shitty command line shell, and is gratuitously incompatible with most of the open source software out there. And what does it get you? Where is your advantage? You blow a huge chunk of your R&D budget every year competing with Linux - a server OS that is kicking your ass on all the plumbing.

"If you had any sense at all, you'd follow the Apple model of adopting an open source OS core, maybe maintain your own kernel borrow everything else with a BSD license ala Darwin and reimplement the windows experience on top of that.

You'd solve most of your security problems, be able to repurpose a bunch of high dollar resources, get a bunch of free software supported on your platform, and if you did a good job at giving back to the communities (like the safari team does for konqueror) people would stop thinking you were fascist dick heads."

They always look at me like I'm crazy. Whatever. Let 'em live on their treadmill.