To be honest, I would not care at all about it, I would not even care about running on a Linux box, given my IDE works on a new system (which I am happy to upgrade on an OS with different kernel and no downward compatibility), if my Office suite ran, if all my essential apps were available and updated to run on a new OS. My biggest gripe about Linux is the horrible UI as well as lack of professional software applications. In the desktop world only Microsoft would be able to provide a new OS capable of serving the mass market. Linux failed at that and for good and understandable reasons.
was't my comment ""No viruses on Windows anymore?" That was the give-away, utter and complete hoax." enough to point out that I am aware of the hoax? Reading/listening seems much more difficult for some than writing/speaking, despite us only having 1 mouth and one hand (to write) but 2 pairs of eyes and pairs of ears. One must wonder...
Innovation happening in UI solutions on Linux is worth a look if someone is interested in new trends in this space. Many users like certain distributions particularly for their innovative GUI . Apparently Microsoft is looking too: http://www.neowin.net/news/windows-threshold-here-come-the-virtual-desktops Microsoft is not the only one capable of providing OS and backing it with support and applications. Apple is sensing opportunity after Microsoft made strategic mistakes on OS front recently and is lowering prices of its mainstream desktops/laptops hoping for growing number of Windows refugees looking for alternatives. Android is another competitor. For Linux it is not the lack of professional software but rather distribution, support and market fragmentation that is not helping it to gain traction. Linux can appeal to two extremes - someone in need of basic functionality with zero cost or professionals who want to have the ability to control and modify computing environment tailored to their specific needs. One can add to this list computer enthusiasts willing to experiment with this OS. Mainstream user is definitely better off with Windows and in some cases with Apple.
Each firm has carved out its competitive advantage. Microsoft in the general broad based desktop market, they will never be a top tier player in the mobile market. And that is ok, in a few years new trends and innovations will spring to life and MS again will have an opportunity to jump on board unless they again oversleep. Apple on the other hand will never be a dominant player in the desktop PC market and they do not have to be. I can totally see how they will dominate TV in a few years, signing major contracts with content providers. Long-term I do not see any reason why middle men like Netflix should survive, in the long-term it is content providers and hardware providers who will have to battle it out amongst themselves. And let's not make a mistake, desktop PCs will be a major force for the next several decades simply because mobile platforms will never provide the same productivity than a desktop machine does. Linux/Unix are and will be dominant in the server market where UI and "customer experience" does not mean much. I am not saying that Linux will not have the opportunity to more forcefully push into the broad retail market but a lot of things will change. Your once free-of-charge linux distro and software apps will not be free of charge anymore if a software house needs funding to support the many designers, UI engineers, and other folks to make a software appealing to broad retail, simple as that. And what are you talking about linux not lacking professional software tools? Have you seen truly amazing CAD or graphics apps on Linux, professional audio apps, programming IDEs, Bloomberg, innovative office packages (please let's agree the poorly imitated spreadsheet app can hardly be considered up to snuff other than adding couple cells, nobody uses it for serious spreadsheets, macro, plug-ins,...), trading apps, and a host of other applications that anyone, wanting to be productive, would use on a daily basis. The applications I have seen running on Linux machines look like 1998 apps, horrible UIs, horrible user interactivity. Linux makes a great system to host trading algorithms, to run servers, to run pure calculations and CPU intensive work, then on the retail side to play couple youtube videos, music, and browse but that is about it. It makes for a good OS for HTPCs but do I want to perform my daily work on a Linux machine? Hell, no. Only masochists program C/C++ code in a text based editor in 2014. But anyone wanting to be productive, pump out well tested software in a competitive time frame, use team collaboration tools, unit test, memory and performance profile, would never never ever code on a linux machine. Oh, you get there at the end of your post, so yes I guess we agree where the use cases of Linux/Apple kick in and who uses Microsoft and there are all good reasons for doing so.