[quote=SirDirty]IBM invested time & money into Linux because much of it was a freebie, remember.
Linux is their main OS next to AIX and they keep investing in it, because it has proven to be very advanced system. Oracle, Novell does the same.
To show how stupid this claim is:
IBM's jfs file system was ported to Linux, so it's not an effort that company takes, because something is just a freebie. Furthermore, IBM is one of the main companies that works on the Linux kernel:http://www.linuxfoundation.org/news-media/infographics/who-writes-linux-2013
You can notice how many people are working on the same kernel and how fast development is. Next time you'll write some bull do some research.
If you want to build a global desktop OS to beat Windows you'll have to really invest the money--Linux just won't do, open-source development is far too insecure and slow for a global commercial *desktop* OS.
This is just silly. Open Source model has proven to be far more secure and successful. There are companies who check the quality of code (like Coverity) and Open Source projects have same quality as closed ones. However, what they don't take into account is the time needed to fix critical vulnerability exposure. Just compare Linux to Windows. It takes months to close CVEs in Windows (and some of them won't be EVER fixed, because it's still based on broken DOS principles), but only hours in Linux. This is the power of Open Source and this also shows how closed development model is weak and insecure. Linux is growing much faster than any other closed source project, so your arguments are nothing, but false and wishful thinking. The only thing that Linux currently lacks are some specialized programs. It beats Windows in everything else.