because of network effects that will kick in when Linux finally reaches market share that has to be respected (I expect that to be somewhere close to 10 %), this is much more important. And now when Steam came to linux, that can be kickstarted, thus never say never :)

Linux has something like 60% of the mobile market already.

I'm perfectly serious, the cognitive dissonance that fact causes in Linux desktop enthusiasts is very revealing. If 'Linux' ever gets anywhere on the desktop, it will be one 'distro' (I prefer to call them Operating Systems) running one desktop environment with one primary application development framework that does so. That's because that fact that Linux has anything to do with Android, or FirefoxOS, or Ubuntu Mobile is basically irrelevant.

What actually matters is the UI layer and the development framework. That's why the fragmentation in Linux distros has killed any chance of Linux taking over the desktop. It's because the things that actually matter - desktop frameworks and development environments - are where the main fragmentation lies. For desktop dominance it's that desktop layer that has to be as unified, robust and compatible as possible.

Here's what keeps Linux off the desktop for most users: the monopoly known as Microsoft Office.

Oh, and games. Definitely games.

Is it necessary to be snarky like this in every thread that mentions Linux?

Well I guess it depends on what threshold you set for 'necessary', but man I've been hearing this nonsense since 1999 - actually I preached it myself back then. And just like former smokers are the most obnoxious anti-smoking crusaders, every time I see a comment like the GP I roll my eyes and feel the need to warn others to not fall into the same cult-like thinking I did back then.