I lookes it up, and the quote I was thinking of was this:

“If 386BSD had been available when I started on Linux, Linux would probably never had happened.”

So yeah, sorry about getting the timing of things wrong, and thank you for correcting me.

I do still think however, that if not for Linux, it would be BSD running most servers and such.

IIRC, one of the main reasons Linux is so dominant for server-usage is because it was released before BSD. If Linux had never been made, BSD would very likely have taken its place. If BSD wasn’t made either? Some other Unix-like. Maybe Solaris or Mac. If Unix was never invented, then maybe Windows would take its place.

I’m well aware that Linux is niche for home-use, but I think that’s going to change very quickly, and I should like to hasten such changes.

It’s a shame my instance has disabled downvoting.

Linux is not exclusively for anti-capitalist FOSS-lovers like myself. As you mentioned, there are multiple different corporate distros. Additionally, “The Cloud” runs on Linux: not even Microsoft uses Windows to host their services. And let’s not forget Android and Tizen!

All of that is, however, beside the point. Do you reject Wikipedia because it too is created by volunteers? Software, like knowledge, exists beyond the concept of scarcity.

If us FLOSS-lovers had our way, no one would ever have to pay for software, as it would be maintained by the community. And of course, most such projects and developers accept donations.

I hope this does not fall on deaf ears, though I understand that the concept of working to improve the lives of others (and one’s own life) without some form of direct payment is… foreign, to many people living under capitalism.

“Even when they’re trying to compensate for it, experts in anything wildly overestimate the average person’s familiarity with their field.”

Here me out: instead of a full-fledged OS, it’s a .exe file that installs the distro of the user’s choice?