Zoroastrianism is about 2500 older than me, it surely should be thriving! Honestly I don't see what your first paragraph adds to the discussion besides being a

Zoroastrianism is about 2500 older than me, it surely should be thriving! Honestly I don't see what your first paragraph adds to the discussion besides being an argument of authority of your own opinion being more valid than of anyone younger than you. About the rest, I can not see how having an end-to-end full open source ecosystem is a worthwhile goal. Open source developers have shown a great propensity towards politics and petty conflicts of personality. I believe the basic stack of our computing lives should be open source, to have a level playing field where all competitors and collaborators can gain users based on merit. But software applications should be able to be closed source if the users wants them. Gaming can stay closed source if that creates better games, as a game is almost never a library or an API that can influence other software. And specially: because experience and practicality have shown that closed source games are better. I want to enjoy the best software possible. In the case of games, I want the best games possible. I don't care if they are closed source. In fact, it's better if they are not, as this will help prevent multiplayer cheating. I want Valve doing Linux games because that will motivate someone in the future to create some kernel innovation, but I want Valve doing Linux games also because I want good games in my favourite open platform, instead of the crap tux games showcased as better in some way just because they are open source.