I think the article had some interesting points, but a lot of them were ignorant. IBM issued the subpeona's in order to investigate whether those companies are funding SCO's suit and claims. I don't think companies would develop any more "closed source" hardware if microsoft went away than they currently do. There is a variety of hardware available and always will be. Certain hardware is designed with certain tasks in mind. Other hardware is designed to be cost effective more than focusing on one thing. And if everyone goes Open Source on the software side, then the companies will be more likely to participate in that. If Open Source won the fight, then they'd have to be more willing to work with Open Source projects in order to survive, because it would be obvious that that's where the market lies. Thus, his theories are fine and dandy, but they don't hold a lot of water in my book.