I feel like you ignored everything that I wrote, particularly the bit about it being important to call things using their correct names for the sake of effective communication. I.e., container orchestration software vs operating system.

As for the rest of your argument, I feel ambivalent on whether it is worth responding. But here's my two cents:

1) Random userland software bundled with the OS does not constitute part of the OS. And that's not just my opinion, that's the legal ruling in the 2001 United States v. Microsoft Corp case, where Microsoft tried that argument.

2) I think it is a bit disingenuous to try to present Kubernetes as some sort of a natural evolution of the term, when it is pretty clear the intent behind calling something "THE operating system of the cloud" is marketing and to try to drive up the hype.

As for the "being able to parrot" bit, please spare your personal attacks. They don't make your argument any stronger, they just make me think it is not worth talking to you.