a morning chill wrote: "Tell that same thing to the millions of users that want to switch to Linux, but when attempting to convert they are met with README and COMPILE_INSTR files that require them to learn far more than they should. Why should an accountant lawyer want to spend a few months worrying about the proper methods for .configure so that it won't conflict with kernel modules? He shouldn't, but that's how it would work for the crossover."

I'm one of those people. I'm concerned about MS security. My livelihood depends on it and, if I were 30 or 40 yrs younger, I'd probably be running a Linux box.

I come from the age of the manual typewriter, and simply want a system I can start and do work on. There are certainly people my age who enjoy experimenting with operating systems. I want and need one that works for me immediately on startup, with as few keystrokes as possible. Windows and Apple do that.

If Linux ever reaches point and click simplicity such as Windows and Apple, I might reconsider. I, and I think tens or maybe hundreds of millions like me, have no desire to learn the intricacies of an OS. We just want it to work for us. The Linux experts could still go in and play with it, and those of us who just want to use it for our work could have the simplicity that Windows and Apple computers offer. To me, it would be the best of both worlds.

For now, I rely on a good firewall, antivirus, and other tools to, hopefully, keep me and my work safe.