“Jackson, however, could bone up a bit on Linux and open source
software. Linux advocates might take his description of the Linux
as a “fringe” operating system in stride. But some of his
comments do betray a more serious knowledge gap: “Consumers could
not turn from Intel-compatible PC operating systems to
Intel-compatible server operating systems without incurring
substantial costs, since the latter type of system is sold at a
significantly higher price than the former,” he writes,
failing to notice, it seems, that Linux is an Intel-compatible
operating system for clients and servers. By adding, “very few
consumers would buy expensive servers” he is correct, but again
fails to note that Linux can run even as a server on some very
cheap and old-fashioned PCs.”
“This entire argument is undergirded in various parts of the
findings of fact by one serious definitional flaw: Jackson sees PCs
as one thing and servers another, rather than making the
distinction between individual desktops, clients, and server PCs.
This bolsters his argument against Microsoft, but it muddies up the
casual observer’s understanding of what a PC is. And it avoids
mentioning the inroads Linux has made thus far — it accounts for
near 17 percent of the total server market.”