Rudd-O claims that Linux is ready for the desktop, and this is no longer a debatable matter. A bold claim, and one I personally would not make lightly, but there it is.
Seeing as it is no longer a debatable issue, Rudd-O doesn’t bother to debate it. He passes on an anecdote or two about his unsubstantiated view that Linux being a better desktop OS no longer depends on opinion, but on “scenarios”, which seem to be his opinion of what narrow circumstances show it in best light.
This issue is, and continues to be, so much hot air.
Tags: Desktop Linux
These are the ramblings of 
You said my opinions were unsubstantiated. I invite you… sadly it’s in Spanish… to read my thesis work and see how it’s considerably substantiated there. I also invite you to research the number of desktop deployments around the world, to see whether they’re all on a whim or they have been researched and carefully planned. After that, please corrrect your assertion.
There is no reason to correct my assertion. You claim that Linux is ready for the desktop and that this is no longer a debatable matter. That is a bold, and I believe foolish, assertion of your own.
Yes, there have been well-managed, well-executed migrations to Linux desktops in narrow business scenarios, but that does not mean that “Linux is ready for the desktop” and it certainly doesn’t mean that “this is no longer a debatable matter.”
I can think of several reasons why Linux is not ready for the desktop, and I challenge you to explain away these deficiencies.