When free software passes the "gift test"

Alex Scoble has a long, well-argued post on why people may not switch to free software.   Basically, it's that switching costs are too high, in reality or perception, mainly because of the difficulty of learning new software.  

I am particularly fond of this argument, since it was the genesis of the best recommendation of my Paine Webber career.  In 1985, I was lucky enough to recommend Lotus within a few days of its bottom, and then I happened to sell out within a few days of its top in 1987.  (When you're that precise, luck is playing a huge role.)   I could go on at some length reminiscing about how cool the recommendation was -- attaboys came in from, among other, guys name Gates, Shirley, Kapor, and Esber -- but let's get back to the matter at hand:

The argument works a lot better for apps than for system software.   Application sotware  is used by lots of notechnical people.  System software, by way of contrast,  is used by a staff of IT professionals that has specialized expertise, is small, or both.    Retraining is a much less costly matter.

Now, system software can get baked into the environment, if for example apps use a lot of product-specific features.  But if open standards really work for you, reasonably well even if not perfectly, switching the system software products underneath can be a very practical option.