IMO, The difference being overlooked here is that the reason windows is so smooth is because it’s cost effective to target it when you’re making hardware.
If MS pivoted to a Linux Kernel, then all that hardware will quickly get better support for it. Hardly anyone does this today because the juice isn’t worth the squeeze (yet).
> then all that hardware will quickly get better support for it
Google has infinite money, a golden membership of Linux foundation, they ship Linux-based OS used by billions of people. Even they can’t support Linux kernel, instead they are supporting many thousands of lines of code of kernel patches for their Android.
I think the reason is Linux architecture. Specifically, the fact Linux insists drivers are compiled into the kernel, instead of providing an ABI for them.
Google has money. Unfortunately it has no HW design expertise. They could do what IBM did in the 80's: create a platform. But it is too much for google. And, taking into account the crap they make, it is better that way.
If MS pivoted to a Linux Kernel, then all that hardware will quickly get better support for it. Hardly anyone does this today because the juice isn’t worth the squeeze (yet).