Does that guy seriously maintain bugzilla for the Linux kernel and yet cannot decide whether Linux is an operating system or not:

> Linux is not an operating system

> While Linux is unrivaled on servers and has been the world's most popular operating system for over two decades, the situation on the desktop is quite bleak.

It either is or is not. It is illogical to claim both true and false to be true at the same time, yet that is what he did.

I suspect that the unspoken bit here is that hardware qualification is extremely important.

On the desktop, Linux is an afterthought for the vast majority of consumer hardware vendors. Many Linux desktop users run configurations which could generously be called “alpha”.

With MS windows, this burden is shouldered by every hardware manufacturer. It’s nonsensical to release a peripheral which doesn’t work on windows. Laptop/desktop makers then qualify common applications to make sure everything works as expected.

If any of the above doesn’t work out, then MS will get a call, or the hardware vendor.

>Sadly it's not just one bug tracker, I keep an eye on many of them.

How many Microsoft or Apple bug trackers do you have access to? The fact is that we have to consider that open-source work is largely done by volunteers and commercial developers with their own use cases in mind, and we only know about the drama because it's out in public. The drama inside big tech firms could be worse and on a larger scale and we would likely not know about it. Even if an insider told you something, it would be only a small part of a bigger picture you can't see.