who then admits linux has a much greater spread overall, given how many actual systems there are
I hope you aren't referring to me, because you would be telling lies again. The most pervasive OS is ITRON. Stop telling lies about Linux.
(that aren't PCs or servers or laptops, like every other blinkered CS type here keeps insisting is the only thing a computer can be),
LIAR! YOU never qualified the debate, YOU assumed you were right and knew some hidden truth, that you could play as a trump card, but didn't see ITRON blew your bullshit away. I called you on your bullshit in post #47;
"I never said that either. I have a PDA, there are smartphones. Hell there's even a microprocessor in my washing machine. You are saying people say that, but it's a lie."
given how many manufacturers have adopted linux and the idea of a small robust kernel, or redesigned it, rebuilt the monolithic design to include realtime features; have no idea what sort of influence that paradigm has had and how popular the linux paradigm is in the industrial world
NOT as popular as ITRON. Counter to your claims and attempted redefinition of the debate.
- that's the one MS doesn't control; goes on about linux having to conform to a GPL, which I don't give a rat's ass about.
'Linux' conforms to the GPL. 'Linux derivatives', ...well, as Linux took tools from GNU, how much of what do you need to qualify a distro as 'Linux'? The linux kernel? But you have mentioned that the kernel has been redesigned, so it's not the same open source Kernel!
All you really have, is an assertion that open source software is quite popular. WELL DUH!
They have the large games market
How many times no? MS lost money replacing dead X-Box consoles. Halo-3 was the first game to turn a decent profit for them. So, MS make money from folks buying PC's to run games on. To infer this means they have a 'large' share of the 'games market' is like saying that TV manufacturers do, because you need to attach a TV to a games console!
and their messy systems sw, that is required to get all those expensive apps going.
Having written software on MS platforms, it's far from 'messy'. The API's are a breeze to use, and I created a nice simple app that suited my purpose in weeks, with a web front end, database back end, and all transactions being queued nicely. It was like building with LEGO.
IOW, they may have to abandon NT and start again (they may well be planning something like this, I'd say they aren't as blinkered as the people at this forum are about computers and software, what it is and how it works).
Abandon? Maybe. What would that prove? None of your other assertions. I rather think they will redesign, but they need to keep backward compatability to retain market share.
Anyway, do you have a point you can prove, or are you just going to spout more rhetoric?