You seem to be laboring under the impression that the success of Linux is tied to the needs of the mythical "average user"

Nope. You're once again just fabricating statements that no one is making.

Linux is not a business so "success" can be measured in a myriad of ways. One of which could be the number of people adopting it as their main desktop/laptop OS. For that, it has to be able to run the software most people are using.

This is also the topic of discussion that you seem to be missing entirely.

in addition to thinking that Linux is somehow responsible for the fact that MS doesn't make Office binaries for it, or Autocad doesn't make binaries for it, etc.

More things you're just making up. No one thinks Linux is responsible for those things. If you want to have an argument with yourself, feel free to write it down on a piece of paper or something.

I find your premise to be flawed

You clearly don't understand what my premise even is, so you couldn't possibly.