This is what I don't understand. I understand that most consumer activities (e.g. mail, social, search) can be achieved on mobile without missing a beat. Static content and most dynamic content have been solved for mobile devices for a while. What they seem to miss is that any substantive work is a hassle to complete on mobile.

If you ignore the lag from the CPU or memory constraints, the interface is just not conducive for working. Who wants to edit text documents or spreadsheets, used a shell, or edit code on a 5 inch screen? Who wants to use a soft keyboard for any non-trivial amount of work? It's not that it can't be done; there are much more attractive options readily available.

There there's the argument about connecting mobile devices to monitors, using adapters/bluetooth for peripheral devices, and thin client setups. If that's the case, why don't you grab a cheap laptop? Mobile is gimping you at that point.

Once you accept the fact that the meme of the dying desktop and mobile only comes from people who are "creative" by answering mails/reacting on social media and dragging things from A to B, you will quickly understand that the desktop on which most of the grunt work gets still done will still be there for a long time.

> Without Mac OS there'd be no iOS apps (or at least, many fewer). And without Windows there'd be many fewer Xbox and likely Android apps too.

One can develop Android apps just fine on Linux. It's a superior experience to Windows or macOS IMHO.

Honestly, I find the modern Linux desktops friendlier to non-power-users than modern macOS or Windows.