Earlier quoted context omitted.
I strongly disagree with the sentiment that the solution is "another closed-source unix/linux-based operating system that throws away X.org and its attempted modern replacements, that can directly compete with OS X" We don't need more closed, we need more open. What we need is massive rewards for open hardware via customer money. As long as wireless cards and graphics cards are closed by default and drivers are BLOBe…
No, GNU/Linux needs less fragmentation. It needs a full OS stack, from the kernel to the UI toolkit, that is guaranteed to be the same, across all distributions. Where are the Mac OS X frameworks on GNU/Linux? Nowhere, because each distribution might be using a total different way to play sounds, music, doing SIMD, process images, accessing databases, UI toolkit ....
Then there wouldn't be "distributions", plural.
> Where are the Mac OS X frameworks on GNU/Linux?
Where are the macOS servers? Where is macOS running on a raspberry pi? Where is macOS running on your home router? On your watch? On your supercomputer? GNU/Linux does just fine.
macOS suits one use case, and one only (though it's very visible); don't make it sound like everything else sucks.