Just when I thought Microsoft couldn't do worse than it's done, I see something like this ad:
It wouldn't be so bad if the person quoted actually still worked for his State (Illinois in this case). Nor would it be quite as bad if the person in question - Paul Campbell - weren't involved in a swirl of federal subpoenas, allegations of serious ethics violations, and general incompetence.
Campbell's so slick, I wouldn't be surprised to see him out hitting the campaign trail for Microsoft's OOXML efforts.
Regardless, there are still uneducated people that think of open source and Linux as one open-source project as "science projects" and "risky." Apparently they think it's less risky to give away control of their IT to a vendor based on a few flashy demos from a sales engineer. They will learn in time.
For now, repeat after me: The real risk is in proprietary software. Period. It requires you to pay before you actually touch the software. It's hard to think of a bigger risk than that. Because if you can evaluate open source and proprietary solutions before paying, then both would be essentially de-risked. But only open source is confident enough to treat customers like equals, rather than subjects.