ah, well i think that goes hand in hand with where the demand is for open source: erp, if i understand it right, sort of requires a couple consultants to fit it to your enterprise; and if that's right, i can see why nobody's been motivated to do an open version of it. there'll still be markets for proprietary software - things like high performance spice simulations and so forth. but i think, for the most part, those will companies that target more niche audiences. so cad and snps and lava are probably safe. palm, i'm not so sure of: i sort of like the sharp zaurus. (heck, its a real pocket sized computer. and you can get it for like $150 now on ebay.)
> if open source developers, Intel and Apple ever got together
the odd thing is that they actually have. intel had linux running on a simulation of the ia64 before they chips were even fabbed, and it was the first OS running on the chip. (after all, were they going to really wait around for msft to do the port?) intel also ported gcc to the chip, and sell/distribute ($$ if you're commercial only) an optimizing compiler, also based on gcc. apple, on the other hand, is now built on bsd unix. and all of the utilities on the system are open source ones. in fact, apple did a "compiled headers" extension to gcc.
> Ballmer would be burning his shares for heat then, they'd be
> so worthless.
the plus here would be that lower software costs could let companies go a bit further with their existing IT budgets. the drawback is, commoditization of the software and falling prices (and, as you say, falling msft share prices.) but then, on the bright side, government hedonic adjustments would probably turn that into a huge boost in productivity. :-P
