It's bigger than that. The Moonlight port clearly proves that Linux can deliver DRM'd media to users. (Hulu has already proven that with its Flash based delivery system, but this should assure customers). I look forward to the day when Real's Rhapsody client can work on Linux and I can download and move audio files to my Sansa View.

Its not Silverlight and its not a port. Get it right.

Im sorry but I find you software purity comment to totally miss a point. A huge point that bothers many, many developers but has never been properly addressed by the Novell/Gnome/Mono crew which surprise, surprise is the same people.

This isnt about whether something is free software or not, it is about the fact that Microsoft cannot be trusted as was shown in the Tom Tom case. Having codecs, standards, formats, platforms, languages and so on controlled by one company has lead....well, Im not gonna give you a history lesson, you know the stories.
There is nothing in the Microsoft promise that cant be rescinded and/or sue people later on. And then what?

You have to remember that Novell signed a deal with Microsoft and that THEIR developers/users are covered by the extortion deal. You remember it right? Its the one where Redmond claims that Linux steals from Microsoft but if you sign here, they will let you slide.
This deal doesnt cover other distros (which is very dangerous since distros really use the same software) and Microsoft is very clear about the legal dangers facing those who dont pay the extortion.

Listen to Ballmer's words about how Red Hat users (that's me!) owe Microsoft money because, you know, Linux has stolen from them. Notice that he mentions that Novell is 'the legit' ones since they have paid the extortion deal.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5B0GTYfPoMo

Having worked about a bit on different projects that use Samba, I know fully well the steps Allison, Tridge and the rest of the people on taht project have to go through to be able to see Microsoft (court ordered) specs and not taint the project later on. Novell employees dont do that because THEY are protected. ( and dont bring up the joke that is the �Non-Compensated Individual Hobbyist Developer� clause of that deal or the fact that the MS-PL license cant be used in our GPLed projects)
As a Red Hat user and developer, which protection do I have and what dangers to GPLed projects do I bring by using a technology that it tainted (mediocre at best. C##? Really?)?

Microsoft's word?
Novell's word?

This isnt an idealogical problem many developers are having but a practical one. By pushing those questions as a problem of 'purity', you are missing the big picture trying to ghettoize it as simple 'zealots'.

And yes, you are right. Microsoft Moonlight (as they call it Ive seen) will always be one step behind.
But its not about the user, it never has been.
Its about Microsoft getting free software developers coming over and working on a platform they control.
Microsoft doenst mind if every open source project would work on their platform because they will have all the power then. Just like they used to before that finnish guy mucked it all up (and let's not forget that bearded hippie and his 'cancerous' license).

There are a bunch of issues that you missed:

1) Why would a Linux user want Silverlight/Moonlight when Adobe Flash is technologically superior?

2) Why would anyone want to use sub-standard Microsoft codecs (just think - no Microsoft codec has ever become a widely adopted standard like MP3 or AVI. There's a good reason for this, Microsoft codecs are garbage).

3) And of course there's the question of why anyone would want Digital Restrictions Management on their computer system? Just think of Spore, where the DRM was so onerous, that the game became the most pirated in history? Think of all of the media formats that have crashed and burned like Sony's ATRAC due to customer avoidance. The consumer doesn't want DRM.

4) An lastly, who in their right mind would imitate products from a company that is a spectacular failure in the marketplace? Yes, I mean Microsoft. Microsoft products don't sell. The shops were full of unsold Vista boxes after it's release, and they will be full of unsold 7 boxes after it's release. The only reason that Microsoft is able to make money, is that they have most of the computer OEMS tied into bundling agreements, so that each computer sold comes with Windows. The company is a failure. Why imitate a failed company's products?

I've been around computers and operating systems in 1973, I know a lot about them, and I would NEVER recommend a Microsoft operating system to anyone. They are technologically inferior, years behind the BSD and Linux Kernels in functionality, bloated and overweight.

Mad Hatter,

Your point (1) is a developer issue, not a end-user issue. The developer will have an opinion as to which one is garbage (Silverlight or Flash).

The end user does not have much saying. A developer picks one and the user is stuck with it.

The Olympics, March Madness, CNN's Inauguration and NetFlix are all built with Silverlight. It does not matter what the user's opinion is, they need Silverlight to view it.

When you talk about DRM you are lumping every DRM system together. Flash comes with DRM, yet, it has not caused the uproar that Spore created.

The reason was that they are very different DRM systems. For example, you never hear a complain about Netflix using DRM.

Denzil,

MLB lost customers because of Silverlight, so they are switching to Flash. I've heard that the Vancouver Olympics will be using Flash for the same reason (don't know it for certain). Flash is a better option, and Silverlight is a dead end.

The customer does matter.

As to Digital Restrictions Management, if it inconveniences the customer, the customer will not put up with it.

And yes, I have heard complaints about Netflx. I've also heard complaints about Apple, and about every other company that uses DRM.