Yep. Something like that, except I wouldn't say extreme neither for simple nor advanced, and I never felt it was any more suboptimal than Windows for the last 10 - 15 years:
Linux is for "grandparents" and enthusiasts. It might not be for AD domain admins, accountants with Windows only software, designers who need the lates Adobe products, people who are into competitive gaming (yet, I think).
This is said as a former enthusiast and not yet a grandparent. I am in the happy position where I can leave the system alone - and be able to fix it if it finds a way to break anyway.
The only reason I didn't jump at it was that I by a fluke didn't happen to have a USB stick or CD to write to handy to install it when I needed it, or I'd have done that.
Windows System Image wouldn't have helped - before applying the patch I had to dig through forums to find, nothing on Windows recognized the device at all.
However, the average person probably isn't comfortable (dare I say should be trusted?) with block-level utilities that can wipe the wrong drive at the drop of a typo. To propose that they should be comfortable with a terminal at all is, to put it kindly, delusional, and it's a great example of the post's mythical excellence.
This is the current meta I see:
- Linux only offers "excellence" to A.) EXTREMELY SIMPLE users who never stray from compatible use cases (which is a surprisingly unsafe assumption) and B.) EXTREMELY ADVANCED users who aren't sufficiently advanced for BSD and can overcome any Linux software compatibility issues or elide them by forcing themselves to use possibly suboptimal alternatives.
- Windows only offers "excellence" to AVERAGE users technical enough to debug in vague, indirect, salt-over-the-shoulder ways (like practicing neuromedicine), but not technical enough to feel comfortable with terminals or desire stuff like more comfortable programming workflow. (Also, bonus: it covers virtually all prospective user software and hardware.)
[0]: https://www.digitalcare.org/system-image-backup-windows-10/