Though I currently use Linux, I am formerly a Windows user. I try to maintain a platform-agnostic mindset, because I do not believe that, at some weird philosophical level, we should be judged or defined by our choice in operating system. I would also like to believe that our personal choice of OS is beginning to matter less and less.
Regarding the clear benefits and much clearer drawbacks from diverting energy toward “full/native/whatev” Linux support, I understand where each side is coming from, but I find it troubling (after searching a bit through these and other forums) how both sides ultimately rely upon generalizations and hearsay to make their points.
I will not exactly quote the commentary directed at the imaginary, homogeneous, group that apparently represents all Linux users. …suffice to say, we do not all look the same, smell the same and do not all have poor fashion sense. (We are not all Richard Stallman, thank you very much) We are not all freeloaders, either; I pay for the products that are not free and donate to the free projects which I find useful.
So please, while I should ignore such statements, it hurts just a little bit to know that some people (who are obviously otherwise super intelligent) have made the decision to disregard a group of people, based purely on their own narrow-mindedness and introverted beliefs, that would seem to have very little to do with the topic at hand. It’s got to be some sort of -ism at work - “OSism”, perhaps. The problem of Linux support should be about the viability of the technologies; not about the personalities of the people using them and what you happen to think of them as a group.
That said, it is plainly obvious that some of the… ahem… less-informed Linux advocates are wandering in here, their heads in the clouds, demanding outlandish things, because they don’t understand what an enormous undertaking and investment such a change would require. Maybe it’s a result of that perceived “free-or-not-to-be”, attitude, maybe it’s something else… I don’t think it’s anything we can know for sure. 
… but I think that people should be treated the same, regardless of OS. If they’re asking plainly stupid questions (there is such a thing) Give em the ol’ brush-off and ignore em… they will go away and you can get on with your day. Beyond the individual offender, there is no reason to seek out some greater whole, at which to take jabs.
The way I see it, each operating system has a certain ratio of freeloaders. Hell, do just a cursory search on this forum; you can quickly find people here mention the ease of just “downloading XP” to use Unity virtually. Hello? Illegal? How is this any better than the perceived understanding that Linux users somehow want everything for free? By that logic, most Windows users are pirates; WRONG.
Whether you think an OS is “fashionable” should not matter. I respect Unity’s business-minded decisions, because like any company, you must profit to survive. I would just like to see a greater attempt to see people, simply as potential customers. (albeit, an uncertain potential, far down the proverbial road…) Putting people down, simply because it’s easy, is evil.
Sorry if I’ve offended anyone, but some of the attitudes here pretty clearly indicate that there is slightly more to the Linux issue than simply the monetary and technological obstacles. 
I don’t really have a question, because I understand the basic ins-and-outs of this whole schpeal… I’ll love you and pay you if/when the time comes… and I’ll totally understand if it never does. These are the breaks.
)