
Linux will become ubiquitous in the year 3000. Okay, that was a horrible joke. Linux is just a kernel, the engine that runs an operating system. By itself, it is essentially useless. Kernels shouldn't be discussed or noticed by normal users. And as such when providing these users with reviews, previews and "professional" opinions, computer consultants, computer reviewers and computer journalists should not spew headlines like "Linux is not ready for prime time", "Linux on the desktop by XXX", "Linux to takeover Windows", "Linux is not ready for desktop" and so on.
Linux, the Unix-like kernel, is as flexible, versatile and powerful as any other kernel on earth, both proprietary and otherwise. The kernel is not only ready for prime time, it is prime time.
All of these points are highly debatable. Every major kernel release sees massive restructuring and reimplementing of core functionality (scheduling, memory management, IO systems, etc). Heck, sometimes it happens halfway through an allegedly "stable" development cycle.
Then there is the disinterest Linux developers seem to have with retaining binary compatibility between releases.
These are not indicators of a carefully designed, mature, easily maintained and stable platform.
Perhaps what these computer consultants, computer reviewers and computer journalists mean to say is, "Are the software applications that run on Linux ready for prime time?".
Undoubtedly, most of them do - but all they're trying to do is simplify an extremely complex field for an audience who knows nothing about it, and that should not be criticised in and of itself. However, the more technically inclined ones who actually are talking about the foundations of Linux are justified in asking such questions. The "sudden" replacement of the VM system halfway through the 2.4 series, for example, is going to make a lot of people nervous for some time.