Here are my responses. What are yours?

1. Linspire's very existence is bad for Linux
Linspire's existence is great. As an OS, it kind of sucks, though. What I like about its existence is the easy answer I have for people who say, "Why can't Linux just be like Windows?" Well, how about Linspire? Remember that Linspire used to be called Lindows before Microsoft filed a lawsuit.

2. Linux doesn't need more users. Linux just needs to be good software
Sure it doesn't need more users, but more users would certainly help Linux out. In order to be the best software, you should have the best hardware compatibility. Linux already has some pretty incredible hardware compatibility as is, but the more users it gets, the more hardware drivers it'll get, and the more games and commercial software will be ported to Linux. It also means OEMs are more likely to pre-install Linux distros on home computers, which means we can get rid of all that "Linux is difficult to install" crap sentiment because no one will have to install Linux (people can if they want to, though).

3. Linux is difficult to install
So is Windows

4. Linux is easy to install
So is Windows

5. Installing software in Linux is difficult
Not entirely true. Most Linux distributions have package managers that have vast repositories of thousands of programs. You search for the program, mark it for installation, and the package manager downloads the programs and their dependencies, then installs them for you.

6. Installing software in Linux is easy
Again not entirely true. There's a lot of software available through package managers (and if there isn't, you can usually enable more repositories), but if you want a more obscure program, sometimes you have to unpack that .tar.gz file and make and ./configure and all that.

7. Linux is more stable than Windows
Not if it's installed improperly

8. Linux isn't as stable as Windows
Not if it's installed properly

9. Regular users (mom, dad, grandma, grandpa) can't use Linux
They can if someone sets it up for them. Who's the someone, though?

10. All distros are the same
Well, not in terms of what hardware they recognize, how easy the installation is, what default desktop and programs are there, the type of package manager, the support community, the number of installation disks, the size of installation, or the logos and icons.

11. All distros are different
Not in terms of the software available, the basic kernel, and the general file structure.

12. Linux should be more like Windows
No, it shouldn't.

13. Linux should be less like Windows
Pick whatever distro works for you.

14. Linux isn't ready for the desktop
oh, geez! Just read my signature and stop all the BS already.

You may have left out the best response:

Try it for yourself.

My 6 year old has no problems navigating KDE on my slack box. Knows where her games are and can open Firefox and get to cbbc webby.

If i showed you Linux & XP side by side before you ever knew anything about computers both would 'hard' but at least Linux would be unlilkely to crash or need re-installing whilst you got to know it.

what you have presented are mostly subjective opinions not myths.

the only thing i find related to myth and belief in the Linux community is the "belief" in "immaculate conception" this "evolved in a vacuum bubble" theory is incidentally also at the heart of the myth of Judaism and indeed all western religions as being total breaks with the "evil" concepts that came before them. This one comes complete with "stories" about "Linus" the founder. Just as America has it's false stories/myths about it's "founding fathers" Moses across the red sea with a miracle as it were. This is of course also at the heart of all western religion because the Bible is essentially the myth of "salvation framed as false history"
There is also in the Linux community an irrational "belief" that somehow Linux stands against M$ as if in some epic and eternal battle between some childishly simplistic good vs evil tale. This one no doubt involves some level of irrational group projection and blaming behavior because Linux has nothing to do with M$. Unfortunately i think your post takes this position as a matter of presumption and therefore is itself a part of the myth or coming from within the irrational belief system.

You're going more by this definition of myth:
A popular belief or story that has become associated with a person, institution, or occurrence, especially one considered to illustrate a cultural ideal: a star whose fame turned her into a myth; the pioneer myth of suburbia.

I'm going more by this one:
A fiction or half-truth, especially one that forms part of an ideology.

And I don't believe Linux stands against Microsoft in some eternal battle because Linux isn't monolothic. Sure, some distributions or Linux users do stand in a battle against Microsoft. Some don't. And Microsoft itself (with its "Get the Facts" campaign) certainly views itself as being in a battle against Linux.

I'm addressing real fictions or half-truths that are out there. Like it or not, people compare Windows to Linux all the time. While they do this, they spread these fictions and half-truths. Many Linux users are disgruntled Windows users. So even if Linus Torvalds himself doesn't view Linux as battling against Windows (and, having read his book, I believe he doesn't care, really), a positioning of Linux against Windows exists in the real world for users, and they should make an informed choice--not a choice based on myths (second definition or first).

Interesting thoughts. Good points raised... I agree with most of what you say.

I'm a little confused. I thought I had posted it in General...

Yes, I occasionally make the same mistake and then wonder how it happened. Usually happens when you have multiple LQ windows/tabs open in your browser. Or I sometimes click the new thread button when I am reading a thread in another forum and not thinking which forum I'm posting it in.

There is a "Linux - General" forum, as well as a "General" forum. (The "General" forum is listed just below the LUG forum.)

"Linux - General" is a technical discussion forum, and is intended to cover topics that don't necessarily fit into any of the other forums. In contrast, "General" is a non-technical discussion forum, and is intended for miscellaneous comments about both Linux and non-Linux topics. -- J.W.

Thanks.

I agree with your post for the most part actually.

Number 3 and 4 dont make sense. Just because windows could be easy to install or not does not have anything to do with Linux being difficult to install or not.

You missed out a popular one from the M$ zealot camp:

Linux sucks
No it doesn't

I think one of the biggest myths in the software industry is that money lies only in developing software for the majority OS (Windows).

I think commercial Linux software has a lot of potential. The myth that Linux users use only free(beer) software has go to go.

Free Software can easily coexist with Commercial Software. In fact the existence of good Free Software alternatives should be an incentive for commercial software vendors to provide quality Linux software at fairly competitive prices. The growth potential is enormous considering that Linux awareness is seriously expanding in many Asian countries, including India.

More Linux users should start echoing their views in public regarding software availability for Linux. People should stand up and reject Windows software if they don't use Windows. Nobody should be forced to spend more money just to switch to another OS for software availability. I think if more of the community stood up and demanded software written for Linux then big companies would definitely consider at least porting some of their Windows software to Linux. This is already happening in many cases and it's a good thing.

Nero is a good example. But we need more. Adobe Reader is another good example. More Adobe products on Linux like Photoshop would definitely be a great boost to Linux. ATi drivers are improving day by day. nVidia has always been Linux friendly.

All these are good signs for Linux.