Correct, this is why I relatedly believe the Linux Desktop is actually a ridiculously huge success. I don't compare it by percentage of market share, I compare it do "how garbage would desktops be if Linux wasn't around to provide useful pressure?"
> I compare it do "how garbage would desktops be if Linux wasn't around to provide useful pressure?"
In what world does Linux on the desktop provide "useful pressure" to anyone? The only Linux "desktop" that has provided any pressure on the desktop to Microsoft and Apple is ChromeOS. ChromeOS is decidedly not a "Linux desktop". If Google flipped ChromeOS to Fuchsia tomorrow it would provide the same pressure with zero Linux.
I mean, there's an argument to be made that Android / ChromeOS / Fuchsia wouldn't exist without Linux either (i.e. not exist as they are or in some similar open source variation). They don't stand quite as independently as you suggest here.
The comment I replied to was specifically about Linux on the desktop, not Linux in general. I didn't claim Android etc wouldn't exist without Linux. Linux on the desktop is just irrelevant to commercial desktop OSes. Microsoft, Apple, and Google don't care one iota about the latest updates to GNOME or KDE.
Third parties don't care about the Linux desktop either. If Linux is even considered it's a distant third place. If Electron dropped Linux support tomorrow a good number of applications would drop Linux support the next day.
Even the likes of Valve supporting Linux is more of a hedge against Microsoft than anything compelling about desktop environments on Linux.
It's actually important to have difficult or impossible goals. They are guidelines or north stars used for navigation. It helps make short term decisions that trend in the right long term direction.