Another problem is the mistaken belief among Linux advocates that open-source software equivalents to popular commercial Windows software and games are adequate, according to Geoff Perlman, CEO of Austix, Texas-based REAL Software Inc. "The mass majority of computer users are conservative. They want to use the software they're used to using," said Perlman, whose firm makes software to ease the rewriting of applications from one operating system to another.

Mainstream users just aren't going to voluntarily switch to Linux if it means they have to give up Photoshop, Quicken or even Microsoft Office, said Perlman, who calls the current dearth of commercial software a "drought."

Dave Rosenberg, principal analyst with the Open Source Development Labs (OSDL) in Beaverton, Or., agreed. "Does OpenOffice meet my needs? Almost. Does GIMP (open-source photo editor) meet my needs? Same answer," said Rosenberg, who is also the CIO of San Francisco financial research firm, Glass, Lewis Inc. "Drivers are still a real drag. My laptop running Ubuntu only lasts half an hour. But these are solveable problems. So we're getting there."

Experts agreed that Linux advocates need to re-examine recent tech history in order to avoid being doomed to repeat it. For instance, Perlman argued that Windows only gained wide acceptance after Microsoft's 1991 release of Visual Basic 1.0, its drag-and-drop software development tool that made coding Windows apps much easier. After that, "software titles for Windows began pouring down like rain," he said.

Enderle, a former IBM employee, pointed to IBM's experience with OS/2. Internal strife between IBM's hardware and software divisions, and a patronizing attitude towards customers caused top IBM executives to "cherrypick" the tactics they could agree upon rather than embracing the overall strategy they "knew they needed to do to win with OS/2" against Windows. Linux, with its open-source community and multiple vendors, has it even worse, said Enderle.