> By that reasoning, no OS is suitable for non technical users.
That was the point GP was trying to make (a bit snarkily and sarcastically) in response to the argument that Linux is not suitable for nontechnical users.
Right, but GP is dead wrong. Windows and MacOS are far more suitable for non technical users on average. Mint is great for people that have standard hardware and need nothing more than a browser, but it's still not on par with the big two.
That Linux is less accessible than windows or MacOS may be true (I personally agree with you about windows, less so about macOS), but if an argument is not acceptable about windows, it can't be accepted about Linux either. If both OSs seem to suffer from difficult-to-fix issues when turning monitors on and off, that can't be the reason why Windows is more non-tech friendly.
I think that this is the bulk of the argument here.
I can't really agree with that on windows. When I've had to use it, I've always had gnarly issues that I don't think I'd be able to deal with if I wasn't knowledgeable about computers. Sometimes, even then, basic functionality just doesn't work at all. It's further complicated by the software not giving proper insight into what is going wrong so as to make it impossible to deal with.
No one up to iOS v14 or so ever asked me for help on using it or really fixing it. MacOS passed the grandma test for me and generally requires less user support. But iOS under jobs was a gold standard in usability.
I've found non tech users find MacOS far less intuitive honestly. I do think the Windows paradigm is probably the most intuitive, with a startbar launcher and apps being clearly separated in the taskbar and not grouped together under a bouncing icon.
No, just normal Microsoft prioritizing features over fixing bugs. I have a "shit_win_bugs" bookmarks folder which is growing in size every 1-2 months.