SoloCodigo

I don't see people moving towards Linux — I see people moving away from Unix.

[But] will there be one operating system that everyone uses? No.

There are several key arguments as to whether Microsoft or open source is preferable for any one organisation. The first one is often price. And of course a critical argument is that Linux can be free. It's difficult to beat that.
You might get a free car from your uncle. But you're the one who ends up with the mechanical bills. It can be cheaper to buy a new car and get the guarantees. Then there are the costs of deploying Linux engineers.

Windows has tens of thousands of drivers. Then there is ease of use. There are multiple management tools needed to manage the Linux environment. You don't have a single complete management solution.

What about security? Windows has more vulnerabilities than Linux.
I disagree. Look at the Forrester Days of Risk report [which found that Microsoft takes an average of 25 days to patch a flaw, compared to Red Hat's 57]. We fix the problems faster.

But Microsoft vulnerabilities are generally more severe though.
No.

When will you be enabling Microsoft Office to run on open source?
We won't. We have no plans.

What is the sense in producing Office for the Mac and not Office for open source?
The Mac product is produced by Apple. If changes are needed then we'll work with Apple. They are just one organisation. We have an agreement which makes good business sense.

Are you unwilling to produce a Linux version of Office because you would need to work with several Linux distributors?
I don't know in that regard. If people want to run Office then buy Windows. Or a Mac.