Nope. It's actually mostly Redhat behind Linux.
Nope. It's the whole world. Including Microsoft.
I don't know why a surprising amount of people are so adamant the disappointing market adoption of Linux on desktop is some evil plot instead of looking at the product.
There's no evil plot. Just marketing forces at play.
But he let everyone do with it as they please so now the average non technical user has 100+ distro's to choose from and will just wlk away from such a choice.
If Linux came bundled with the hardware like Windows, MacOS or Android do, what choice of distro you'd be talking about? What Android distro do I have to chose?
Why vendors don't want to bundle Linux on the desktop? Because of all those options? Give me a break. They don't care about that. It's precisely their job to eliminate all those options.
Look at Android. Google standardize Linux and offer that to vendors. Vendors take care of all the incompatibilities with their hardware and offer the user a polished product.
You want an app on your Android phone or tablet? Just download it from Google store. Another way to narrow down incompatibilities between apps and the OS.
Disruptive? god I hate that word, it's what people use to describe ideas they have that have 0 value or practicality.
Hate not. Disruptive here means original. But I used that word exactly to show that Linux is not going to happen on the desktop. Not because of the reasons people are pointing out. If that were the case, Android would never have happened. If that were the case, MacOS would have killed Windows long ago.