I'm pretty sure the GP meant that Windows would become much more attractive to current Mac users, and I agree. A lot of serious computer work is done on Macs, because the Mac client has so much in common with the Linux server. If MS put a Windows shell on top of a Linux kernel, Windows would suddenly become a better complement to Linux servers than the Mac ever was, while still enabling work tools such as Photoshop to still be used (unlike, say, an Ubuntu client). That would make Windows a serious contender for the market of people doing production work on Macs.
You might want to pay more attention to WSL2 then.
I'm a web developer who switched from Ubuntu to Windows earlier this year and WSL has very much been a "best of both worlds" solution. Continuous improvements to VS Code and Windows Terminal have made this transition very painless and WSL2 promises to eliminate most of my remaining pet peeves (e.g. improving Docker integration).
The only downside is that the filesystem is much slower but that's only a problem when compiling native software.
With WSL2, the filesystem is faster than 'native' windows (as long as you stay within the ext4-formatted image), which obviates one of the big Windows irritants for developers.
The one downside of WSL from my perspective is all the small impedance mismatches, wslpath hacks, etc that result from having to work with the two filesystems. And though VS Codes's remote extension makes working on WSL entirely seamless, the situation is messier with other tools. IntelliJ, for example, has some WSL support in individual plugins, but it's patchy enough that I found running the Linux version via an X server more convenient.
Yeah, you elaborated on what I was trying to get at. I own both a MacBook Pro and PC desktop. If Windows is as easy to develop in as MacOS, I would move my main work there.
There are developments in there that I appreciate like Windows support for Homebrew.
