The obvious issue is that for most people there is no significant advantage in using Linux instead of Windows on the desktop, and Windows is already highly established.
Regarding cost, Microsoft can just drop the price of OEM copies of Windows to zero or near zero if it becomes a problem.
Despite the article's claims, most modern desktops have an extremely limited range of hardware (i.e. Intel or AMD CPU + chipset, nVidia or AMD GPU and nothing else non-standard) which generally works fine out of box, so that's not the issue.
The reason Linux is popular on servers is that there was no decent cheap server OS before it, and on embedded because there was no established touch-based OS before Android.
Plus, there's the whole fragmentation issue, with multiple desktop environments and distributions which all suck in different ways, and provide incompatible ways to deliver applications.