I can't image any teacher denying that the concept of open source is one of the greatest catalysts to how knowledge is gained or shared.  After all how many of us have "borrowed" an idea from our fellow colleagues and forgotten to credit them.  Indeed, we may even have improved and modified that idea till we think of it as our own.  Then, of course we share that idea with others.  Not being of the mindset that our "ideas" are our intellectual property we are simply happy to add to the collaborative inquiry of learning and teaching.  In fact this is pretty much how I came to learn about this topic called "open source."  I read many of the articles as indicated in the original assignment.  However, I found the discussion on the Web Board to be most meaningful.  Before I forget I would especially like to thank, Gloria, Tammy, Paul, and Cynthia.  I even thought Cynthia must be reading my mind, because she quoted some of the same lines from "Letting go of Lego" that I was drawn to.  I believe this collaborative effort is the only way I would have been able to finish this assignment, because it has had my quite perplexed.  Being totally ignorant of open source before this week, I would never have experienced the depth of the issue, unless I had read so many viewpoints which approach the subject from so many different angles. (I guess it pays to procrastinate and hand your assignment is almost last.)
However, to sum up my opinions on the implications of OS for education, I would have to draw an analogy to the implications of true science versus technology.  The idea of open source without naming any one operating system, is more like true science.  When a scientist researches and makes a new discovery about the world  around us, he publishes this knowledge for its intellectual worth. People always copy his research to test its validness and often expand upon it from there.  In this way science continues to grow and gain knowledge about the world around us.  Yet. it is usually industry and technology which finds a way to take a lot of peoples research and put it to some practical use, often cleaning it up and making it more practical and accessible.  I guess this is where Microsoft comes in.  I believe without the practicality of technology it doesn't matter how giving or sharing, or collaborative these "scientists" are.  In fact if their knowledge can only be understood by the few "elite" scientists, and no one pulls it together in a practical application that many people can benefit from, both science and technology would suffer.  Therefore, I must conclude with out open source the profitable companies like Microsoft would suffer.  Yet without market managers like Microsoft the open source idea would not excite people enough to lead to education.  The implications in the classroom will be the same as they always have been.  Education in general needs to be practical and in a way that motivates and excites students.  Today's computers can do that.  The idea of open source is how we add to this world's ever expanding pool of knowledge.  One can not flourish without the other, students need the motivation and organization that today's corporate computers offer and education  needs the knowledge that is gained by the idea of open source.