Found a link to this Micro$oft page on LinuxToday about embedded devices and Linux: http://www.microsoft.com/Windows/embedded/xp/evaluation/compare/notlinux.asp Had to post it to the group to vent. I have no idea if Windows or Linux is better for embedded systems, and if it turns out it's Windows then that's fine by me. But the misleading statements on this page just staggered me. My favourites include: *"Even vendors such as Red Hat cannot guarantee the reliability and security of their OS" (And Micro$oft does?) *Microsoft - "There are no hidden or unknown legal and development costs from managing your intellectual property around the GPL." Linux - Discusses an NVIDIA coder who used some GPL code for one of their drivers "The developer failed to realize the code was licensed under the GPL and would therefore require NVIDIA to release the source code for its entire driver. Because NVIDIA did not want to release the source code to its commercial software, the company incurred substantial costs to develop a new driver that did not contain the GPL code." (As opposed to just incurring those costs directly, because there is no similar code to borrow for Windows) *"The Red Hat Worldwide Technical Support Guidelines and Definitions document states that Red Hat will not support any modifications made to their distribution of Linux that are not approved or recommended by them." (Whereas Micro$oft are more than happy for you to hack around in their code, moding whatever you fancy) Thanks for listening, I feel a little better now. Cheers, Paul