In my opinion, the first two reasons are valid. But the author forgots the main reason: There simply is not compelling reason for the majority of people to swit

In my opinion, the first two reasons are valid. But the author forgots the main reason: There simply is not compelling reason for the majority of people to switch to a Linux desktop. Nearly all the good Open Source desktop apps run under Windows as well. But there are quite a lot of good Windows and Mac apps that won't run under Linux. There's no good replacement and Wine is too complicated to be a feasible solution. Commercial desktop ISVs don't support Linux for 3 simple reasons: (1) There's no standard decentral installer. This is the _most important tool_ for desktop ISVs in their sales funnel and Linux has none (or rather: too many half-finished ones). (2) It's not a single coherent platform but several different ones. And it's not going to change without a decentral installer. (3) It's easier and more profitable to develop web and mobile applications today. There's nothing the Linux community can do about (3). But (1) could be solved and in the long run, also (2). If these two problems for commercial ISVs could be solved, the supply of desktop applications could increase. Then, desktop distribution could also make money by reselling these applications. Then, it would also be rationale to advertise. But that's not going to happen, for one cannot rationally discuss the need of a decentral installer with many Linux users (or Linux distributions).