"Why is everyone so interested in making linux mainstream?"
"I like linux as it is. There is an active user-community. It is improving at a good rate (and it is very ok by now, thanks)."
Good. Who said anything about changing Linux. I thought we were talking about whether it's worthwhile for someone to work on Windows portability to Linux, and porting VB in particular. How would doing this make the active user-community any less active? Has working on WINE made Linux any less active?
"I just don't see why we need to worry about how to get gazillions of new users."
You don't, we don't and I didn't think we were. Kenneth makes some good points about how things are accepted. And I'd like to run certain MS apps on Linux. Others would too. I'd like to see Linux move to the desktop so I can eventually get rid of Windows, and so others can experience the benefits of a system that doesn't crash. You choose to not be involved, that's fine. I hope others choose to do this work.
"Don't worry about linux. It is doing just fine, thank you!"
I highly doubt Linux's survival is at stake. HA! Good Lord, no. But having larger acceptance to me is a good thing. Like I said, let's not blow this out of proportion.
Agreed -- a Linux box that crashes as much as Windows wouldn't be any use to me.
But to be more specific, back to the VB port, I doubt any kernel issues would be involved. I haven't seen any plans and I'm certainly not a VB expert, but I'd expect any port to use at most a loadable kernel module, and even that might not be necessary. I mean, I don't have to load a 'gcc' kernel module, right?
So I'm not advocating watering down the kernel, and whatever Linus and Alan are doing to make Linux more user-friendly, frankly I'd be surprised if they made any compromises that would truly affect the competency of the kernel.
If someone can port VB, and it works towards getting Office to run on Linux, without making any technical sacrifices within Linux, then I'm all for it.