I understand that, but I think this reading of my article is too simplified. A large part of my article has one goal: discussing the fact that the GPL has, on

I understand that, but I think this reading of my article is too simplified. A large part of my article has one goal: discussing the fact that the GPL has, on one hand, spurred the FLOSS ecosystem in software components, whilst on the other failed its goal of terminating the existence/relevance of proprietary software. Given the decreasing importance of desktop systems in the consumer world, I also maintain that this failure is now final, that is not subject to change before the end of mainstream relevance of desktop apps (a.k.a "there will never be a Linux desktop year"). You may disagree with this of course, but I wouldn't say that my article implies that I do not understand the GPL, as motters said.