I hate how the author frames Linux as “cheap”.
I don't like it either but it's definitely an aspect. Why should I continue paying money for (or even pirate) something that exploits me and makes my life worse? Linux is cheap and legal. E.g. I can use it to experiment with old hardware without needing to make a cost-benefit evaluation first.
"Free" has a double meaning that should be pointed out each time one says FOSS, but "as in beer" is not a bad thing.
Windows is “free”, too, if you never activate it.
OK now I'm stumped because it's so long I actually used Windows. I rcently installed Windows on some work computers but I had to enter the code on the laptop or I couldn't even finish the installation (I think). AFAIU that code was purchased with the laptop. Did I get that wrong?
And in what way is usability hampered if I don't activate it?