> MacOS doesn’t claim to work on other hardware, Linux does.

Who exactly is "Linux", and what specifically is the claim? It looks to me like you don't want to lose the argument on these grounds, but maybe you could still have a nice laptop with Linux on it that just works.

> Who exactly is "Linux", and what specifically is the claim?

Linux distributions have a set of claims for what hardware they work with, usually as minimum system requirements. Since they are the minimum system requirements the expectation should, within reason, exist that the OS will work if you meet or exceed those requirements.

I say "within reason" because no OS can promise that, minimum is not a forward looking statement and the newest hardware is often the hardest to support.

> It looks to me like you don't want to lose the argument on these grounds

Agreed, because I didn't make any claims that this direction of argument negates. Linux has a harder task supporting a broader array of hardware, that doesn't mean that every argument should compare it to MacOS only on golden/chosen hardware.

If you build a distribution that only claims it works on specific hardware, like SteamOS did, then I agree that's a valid comparison.

> but maybe you could still have a nice laptop with Linux on it that just works.

I'm sure I could, I never claimed you couldn't.