The here is that we cannot allow M$ to push people around like this anymore. I'm a big fan of what is trying to be done here with LindowsOS, even if it isn't perfect. Michael Robertson is taking M$ on directly and challenging them, and he's using his own money to do it. For that he has my support. I'm sick of this M$ obsession with being the only one, like the way they tried to pervert Java and then decided to take they're ball away when Sun wouldn't allow them to butcher it to only run on Windows. I have contributed financially to LindowsOS, as I have to Codeweavers and Transgaming and will continue to do so. Choice can only be good for everyone, we have that with Linux, we will never have that with M$.

Windows is a general name for the little boxes on our gui desktops.
I don't think Lindows was a good move, but MS shouldn't be able
to force them to change the name. If someone comes out with
SmallBizOS, MS will say that name is too close to their "small business server" name. We as a people should not allow companies to copyright generally used names that are part of that particular industies lingo.

" Lindows and Windows. the only difference in names are the first letter."

yeah, but they could call it Lin-Windows if they like,
Microsoft has MS-DOS , MS-Windows and so on registred,
but _NOT_ DOS , Windows which are common words they can't
claim the right for. (dos was "Disk Operating System" at the time, but also a vendor making drilling machines, but
now more known as "Denial Of Services"

I don't think MS-Windows and Lindows is to close,
even if the meaning may be to associate to a replacement for MS-Windows, and that may be the problem for some.

okay, please don't take my comments wrong because i'm a big supporter of GNU/Linux and OpenSource (i'm not a big fan of M$). but.... Lindows deserves to be pushed around by Micro$oft (the big bully). i mean, come on, Lindows and Windows. the only difference in names are the first letter. i mean, naming your product something that is very similarly named to Windows does not show great creativity or precaution, or even respect for the trademarking and copyright system. Lindows didn't have to name it similiar to Windows; but they did because i'm assuming they don't pay their marketing department very good money. they could have named it something else and marketed the hell out of it saying it is "like Windows". anyways, those are my thoughts and i'm sticking to them.

Michael Robertson may not be an angel, but what he argues for is right. for far too long, windows has been ruling people's wallet. while it cost them much more in the form of viruses and security flaws - it is only in the face of competition that microsoft has been forced to "innovate" and release pacthes. so, its time that all the people who have suffered due to MS's negligence get a fair deal, and an alternative.

I think it is wrong to say countries cannot view a web page that is not illigal or indecent. Windows will only win if we the people do not support Lindows and other Linux OS venders. It is nice to have one OS for simplicity, but it opens a door of virus and hackers. With more than one OS, Corporations can protect their assest. As well all know Windows XP has had the most security flaws of all windows OS to date. Should the conumer be forced to buy from a know AntiTrust criminal?