While you are getting downvoted, I have found your point of view to be applicable.. I've definitely encountered managers who have the point of view "we can just

While you are getting downvoted, I have found your point of view to be applicable.. I've definitely encountered managers who have the point of view "we can just use Azure now, why do we need to pay a sysadmin" .. and as well, "Linux isn't professional - Microsoft is professional" is a standard refrain among the ignorant Executive classes, as well. So there is some truth to your statement, imho. I've recently had to port a .Net app to Mono so we can deploy it on Linux - in fact, we're doing everything possible to remove any dependency on Azure, because Azure is an atrocious trap for anyone looking to deploy productively. (e.g. can't clone an instance to .VHD without decomissioning and destroying it first..) Anyway, mono on Linux is distasteful, in my experience - there are too many dependencies and packages and libraries/subassemblies that just are not well described. Its as much about the affront of the language used in the Mono ecosystem as anything else. Unless you have the gumption to invest weeks in understanding the perverted terminology and strange architecture of the mono packages on Linux, you're going to be dissuaded by its complexity - especially if you're used to an open, well-describe taxonomy of the traditional Linux packages' way of doing things.