Why can't open source giants / start ups affect Windows monopoly this way?

It is obvious that Linux has not remained a nerd's thing and can function very well for casual desktop PCs. Also, even heavier distributions such as Fedora are significantly performant than Windows. I heard that some BSDs follow as well, due to open source nature.

According to me, the unpopularity of Linux is because it is not bundled with PCs usually and all people are not enough technical to change the OS. Also, maybe because Linux is free software but doesn't come with warranties although it works better than Windows etc...

Now, Why can't a company produce more affordable laptops for casual users? Say at twice the price of Raspberry Pi, comparatively smaller hardware specs and with lightweight (light speed) distros preinstalled with all essential software.

(Let's exclude gamers as long as virtuous WINE guys need some more genius)

Google Chromebooks have achieved something in this way -- since it is still proprietary stuff, we can keep it just a source of idea.

By distributing laptops at prices near $60, with Linux desktop preinstalled, we can have a great range of desktops for educational purposes -- Not all labs need to have 4GB RAM & Windows on computers.

Also, it is possible to attract potential casual users to get onto cheap, higher performance laptops.

I got the idea after seeing tiny core linux project, reportedly its boot times are attractive while desktop need to be improved and obviously more packages need to be built. One may consider Openwrt with some other rootfs so there would be much packages.

I am curious about problems in doing such a thing -- certainly for larger open source organizations.

( KDE ships slimbook but that is just a new kid on the block -- Not an Idea that can affect the PC landscape.)