"Linux" is more than coreutils. The Mac kernel is no where close to Linux in capability and Apple hates 3rd party drivers to boot. You'll end up running a half-baked Linux VM anyway so all macOS gets you is a SSH client with a nice desktop environment, which you can find anywhere really.

> all macOS gets you is a SSH client with a nice desktop environment

Also proprietary software. Unfortunately, many people still need Adobe.

I personally like Krita, Shotcut, and Darktable better than any of the Adobe products I used to use, but it's a real issue.

E: Add "many people"

The micro-kernel design on macOS has benefits over Linux's monolithic kernel.

You also get POSIX compliance.

macOS doesn't have a microkernel, but it does have userland drivers and it's pretty good at being macOS/iOS. Linux's oom-killer doesn't work nearly as well as jetsam.

macOS has a Hybrid kernel with a decent portion being micro components I thought?

Mach started as a microkernel, but when they jammed together Mach and BSD they put it in the same process so it's not really separated anymore.

Recently there are some hypervisor-like things for security, and more things have been moving to userland instead of being kexts. I'd still say it's less of a microkernel than Linux since it doesn't have FUSE.

> bring macOS up to Linux level GNU with brew.

Ugh, not even.

Simple and straightforward shell scripts that work on decade-old Linux distributions don't work on Big Sur due to ancient macOS bsd tooling.

Just look at stackoverflow or similar sites: every answer has a comment "but this doesn't work on my macOS box."

(I've had to add countless if-posix-but-mac workarounds for PhotoStructure).