Most columnists wait 20 years to look back. I am doing it after 20 columns. This is the Internet age, after all.

meanstreetI wanted to share some of your commentary. Debate a few points. And thank you for reading the column, even those of you who called for my head.

Miller’s Crossing: One of my favorite themes is how difficult it is for active investors to outperform the indexes, which I addressed in columns on Legg Mason and Bill Miller.

Well, Miller’s Value Trust Fund, Legg Mason’s flagship, just passed another milestone. As of the end of May, according to Morningstar, the fund is now underperforming the S&P 500 over a 10-year period. In spite of his current video marketing tour on Morningstar.com, Miller will face further redemptions. And calls for the break-up or sale of parent Legg Mason will grow as Miller and the broader stock market struggle.

A few readers came to Miller’s defense. Reader Get Real correctly urged investors to “Take a look at long term numbers.” Indeed, Legg CEO Mark Fetting has been telling investors that 85% of Legg’s funds have outperformed their Lipper average over a 10-year period. But in my view, this is exactly why Miller’s crossing under the S&P 500 over a 10-year span will prove painful. It undercuts the Legg marketing pitch. And it further underscores the serendipity of performance.

As reader DK1 said, “For the sake of argument, let’s say there are certain fund managers who are smart and savvy enough to consistently beat the market. However, what are the chances of YOU actually picking one of these winners ahead of time?”

Wise words to consider as investors flock to fund manager Ken Heebner as the next Bill Miller.

Technology and the Challenge of Growth: Several of my columns addressed another favorite theme–the growth challenge that technology companies face today.

Where are we on the classic S-curve for technology? In my view, most technology companies are on the cresting top of the S curve. Growth is simply getting harder to come by. Many of you disagreed.

In my column on H-P and EDS several readers pointed to H-P CEO Mark Hurd’s superb track record as the touchstone of their faith in the future of H-P. Reader Jstratt noted that Hurd was “making all the right moves.”

I agree. In fact, my column wasn’t a comment on whether Hurd could make H-P/EDS work or not. It was an observation that H-P and its stock price will have trouble growing. As Reader PK said, “5% growth on $140 billion would suit me just fine. Never underestimate the tortoise.”

I certainly don’t. There is nothing wrong with a tortoise, as long as you don’t expect a hare. And H-P is no hare. Since the EDS deal was announced, H-P’s share price has stayed stuck.

A few reader eyebrows were raised by my assertion that technology today is all about evolution, not revolution. As reader You Have to Be Joking questioned, “The industry is about evolution? How absurd and positively provincial. People have barely begun to figure out how to build applications.” Reader Dude’s interrogation had one word, “iPhone?”

Of course, technology advances. But that isn’t the question. It is the rate of progress that is open to debate. And technology needs a step-function change similar to the personal computer or the Internet to re-accelerate the growth it experienced in the past two decades. It isn’t easy to see where that step-function change comes from.

While I said technology was in its middle age, reader Clayton Hallmark was even more pessimistic. “Tech, especially IT, is in its old age..Moore’s Law, dead in its tracks for 2 years, stuck at 1.72 billion transistors per chip.”

Alcatel-Lucent Revisited: The Alcatel-Lucent saga is far from over. As I foreshadowed in this column, shareholders last week approved a resolution that makes it easier to remove CEO Pat Russo.

I knew that Russo wasn’t well-loved, but reader comments revealed just how deeply unloved. Readers clamored for new blood at the company. From reader Mike, “the company can’t rebuild its reputation until Russo is gone.” From reader Jesse, “She is a bright lady, but does not offer anything but more of the same.”

And, in that vein, reader X: “The real reason Pat has to go is that she has lost the confidence of a majority of the employees. Whether it is justified or not is not relevant. You cannot turn a company around if most of them employees do not have confidence in you as the leader.” That seems right to me. Chairman Serge Tchuruk’s and Russo’s recent bullish forecast for Alcatel-Lucent probably has six months to pan out. If it doesn’t, one or both of them will walk the plank.

A Final Request: So that is the 20th “anniversary” column. If there are subjects involving Wall Street and business that you would like to hear about, please let me know. I am not shy.