I'd say on the contrary, Android shows what it takes to make Linux do well with the general public - a huge company to ignore like 80% of the standard Linux install and build a whole new UI layer from scratch that is designed to appeal to end users.
That's a testament to the inescapable conclusion that X11 is terrible for mobile devices.
There's still Linux underneath -- it's not stock Ubuntu, not by a long shot -- but it's Linux.
"Aunt Marge will be as happy using Linux without even knowing it's Linux"
Unless she wants to print something... [1]
A lot's changed since 2006...
"1. Make sure the printer is turned on. 2. Connect the printer to your system... 3. A message will appear when the system is finished installing the printer..."
https://help.ubuntu.com/stable/ubuntu-help/printing-setup.ht...
Joel, the author of the article you linked to, states the core value of Windows as being "useful to non-programmers" basing it on "By contrast, Windows was created with one goal only: to sell as many copies as conceivable at a profit". The former does not follow from the latter.
Microsoft didn't need to rely on usefulness to anyone to sell many copies, and they didn't. As for why Linux isn't non-programmer friendly, I beg to differ. Android is a prime example and the argument as to why it's not doing well on desktop, as Linus Torvalds puts it, is because no one ships Linux on their desktops. Microsoft has a lot to do with that. When and if they ever do, Aunt Marge will be as happy using Linux without even knowing it's Linux (does the average non-programmer know that Android is Linux?)