I really like the Unix philosophy. And even if Linux it is not exactly Unix, it kind of shares the same philosophy.
I tried very much to like Linux and to use it on the desktop. In the last 20 years I've tried countless times to use it as a desktop. But it always failed. It always reqyired lots of time for configuration as opposed to "it just works". After some time, it always broke something, which required again time to fix. And it doesn't run all the software I want to run. And even if an alternative might exists to some of the software I need, it is always sub-par. It doesn't do what I need, it doesn't do it well and it will run poorly and/or has a poor user experience.
And I am not even convinced someone should relearn how to do things with another software just to give Linux a chance. Sure, if you are 14 and idealistic it might work. But after 30 your time will worth much more.
Software and drivers written some time ago won't work because there's no stable ABI.
The software landscape is very fragmented.
From my long experience with trying to use Linux on the desktop I can give a very long lecture of why it sucks from both user and technical perspectives alike.
On the other hand it is perfect as an server OS, and I make my daily living writing software that ultimately runs on Linux. But please do not force me to use it as a desktop because I've tried to like it but I couldn't.
I pretty much doubt that Linux will be a decent desktop OS unless some company will release an OS based on Linux, pretty much how Google did with Android on mobile.
For desktop community development simply doesn't cut it. Fragmentation, lack of direction and the reinventing of the wheel kills it.
To have a decent server OS you need a single architect and a dictator which will be the only one to take decisions. This is why macOS, primarily an amalgamation of BSD software with a Next skin succeeded.