I’d just like to interject for a moment. I agree that it is most accurately just called Linux.

The GNU project was an attempt to create a free POSIX compatible operating system. At least, that was the vision. Instead of starting with the kernel, as most OS projects do now, GNU started by writing the utilities and other important tools that such a system would use ( most notably the C library and C compiler ). In practice, GNU became an alternative userland that ran on the proprietary UNIX systems of the day. Even MINIX, while being a teaching OS, was proprietary and cost money. The only “free” UNIX was BSD and its existence was being threatened as it was being sued by AT&T ( inventors of UNIX ). Linus set out to create a “free” ( as in money ) POSIX system because none existed. His job was made significantly easier because of the existence of GNU and especially GCC and Bash which Linus selected because they were free ( yes, as in freedom but more important to him at the time — in terms of money ).

Ironically, nobody used the term GNU / Linux in the early days of Linux. That is despite the fact that GNU + Linux would certainly have been the best description of what Linux was in the 90’s.

These days though, the term GNU / Linux, while being politically important, is descriptively wrong.

First, a relatively small fraction of the software installed on a typical Linux desktop is provided by the GNJ Project. The parts that define the experience for the end user ( eg. desktop environment ) are not GNU. Huge systems like X, Wayland, and Mesa are not even GPL ( they are MIT licensed ). Almost none of the GUI applications people use are GNU.

True, most Linux distros ship the GNU userland. Not all though. Most importantly, what make a Linux distro a Linux distro is Linux, not GNU. GNU is not the important part.

Linux dominates in the cloud. These days, the most important aspect of that is Linux specific containerization ( eg. Kubernetes ). Perhaps the most widely deployed Linux in the cloud is Alpine which uses MUSL instead of Glibc and Busybox instead of the GNU core utils. It is not GNU / Linux but it is certainly Linux.

How is modern Linux gaming possible? Well, the emergence of things like Valve’s proton ( not GNU ) are certainly important. But GPU drivers like those from AMD and NVIDIA are even more important and those use infrastructure which is entirely Linux specific.

Look at the Debian project. When we say Debian, we think of Linux and certainly it is one of the distros most likely to be called GNU / Linux. Debian Linux is certainly a Linux and provides the full Linux experience. Debian also offers Debian HURD ( a true GNU system ). Are Debian Linux and Debian HURD the same? They are both “Debian”. The answer though is that they are not at all the same. Debian HURD cannot even host all Debian packages. The truth is that Debian HURD is unsuitable for a huge percentage of the people that daily drive Debian Linux today. You are certainly not gaming on Debian HURD ( it lacks the Direct Rendering Infrastructure for example ). You are not live steaming or video editing either.

How about software developers? I would argue that this is the audience that GNU was originally created for. Well, Debian HURD is unsuitable for them as well because Linux matters more than GNU. For most developers today, tools like Docker or Podman are vital and they depend on the Linux kernel completely to function. These days, these kinds of tools are more essential even than the compiler. You can switch from GCC ( GNU ) to Clang ( BSD - not GNU ) easily. But how are you using containers ( Docker / Podman ) or virtual machines on Debian HURD?

As an extreme example of a Linux workstation, Chimera Linux installs with basically zero GNU software by default ( MUSL again and the FreeBSD userland including Clang / LLVM instead of GCC ). From the perspective of an end-user, it is exactly like any other Linux. Chimera uses GNOME as the DE which is not GNU either.

I can make a Linux system that contains no GNU software and it is still Linux. I can do any of the things that I expect a Linux system to do ( as a desktop, as a server, or in the cloud ). GNU is historically important but, at this point in history, it is completely overshadowed and entirely non-essential. If I take away the Linux though, GNU offers me almost nothing that I expect from a modern Linux.

GNU is still trying to create a free implementation of the kinds of UNIX systems that Richard Stallman encountered in the 80’s. An improvement of such systems you could argue but then again, it still has not got there. For the GNU project to be taking credit for what modern Linux has become is totally ludicrous.

What you are referring to is Linux and, more specifically, certainly not GNU / Linux. “Linux” is not just the Linux kernel anymore—it is the massive ecosystem of software that was designed specially to run on Linux and to work together to create a Linux system. Often people use GNU on Linux but that does not give GNU the right to equal billing. Not anymore.