The year of the Linux desktop arrived long ago, and nobody seemed to take note. It's called ChromeOS. Is it a Windows replacement? No. It's not intended to be.

The year of the Linux desktop arrived long ago, and nobody seemed to take note. It's called ChromeOS. Is it a Windows replacement? No. It's not intended to be. Is it useful? Absolutely, in its context. As a daily driver desktop OS, I need Windows because of my workflow requirements. There's some software that I just love that's Windows-only. Does that mean Linux sucks? No. Do I like Linux? At the CLI, on servers YES. On desktops, not as much- but I know how to use it and can survive. I did it for almost a decade in the 2000's. The author has good points of course. But anybody who is being objective will look at MacOS and Windows as a more polished OS that's got a more consistent UI, better software support (although the gap is much narrower than it used to be) and better hardware support (also a narrowing gap). But isn't that the point of Linux? You can't really have UI consistency when even the developers of the UI's have competing standards. I used to see it as a weakness (and in some cases, it definitely is) but as I get older I'm starting to see the fragmented UI as a sign of its roots rather than as a design flaw. That's not to say I like it (I don't) but it just works for a lot of people.