Yes, by definition. You have every right to, of course! But yeah you're limiting yourself.
> what would it take for me to catch up in order to even begin to unpack and then finally even begin to leverage what you just mentioned?
What did it take for you to unpack/leverage k8s? Similar. SF runs on Linux, and is an orchestrator for fundamental components that you're used to: VMs, containers, and bare metal instances. There's nothing Windows-specific there. Particularly if you deal with a mix of stateless and stateful applications, or if multi-tenancy is an issue for you, SF has valuable strengths.
> not a single employer that matters to me thinks your knowledge of windows crapware is a competitive advantage in the environments most real tech operates in.
Hm, the only windows specific component I mentioned is Hyper-V. Other services tend to be solid implementations of open source projects you probably tolerate, like kubernetes or tensorflow. You know, places where MS is a major contributor. I was talking about our blindness to MS contributions across the spectrum - which you seem to exemplify pretty neatly.
You can limit yourself however you want. Be careful with your blanket statements though; you just excluded a lot of companies from your list of "companies you care about" and "real tech." Airbus, Atlassian, Bitnami, Cisco, Dell, Docker, Facebook, Fujitsu, GE, Hashicorp, Intel, Kaltura, Lockheed, MongoDB, New Relic, Oracle, Nokia, Raytheon, Red Hat, Roku, Salesforce, Samsung, SAP, Siemens, Sony, SUSE, Symantec, Tableau, Trend Micro, and others all work closely with Azure and Microsoft tech... maybe those companies don't count as "real tech" to you. Either that, or you should consider re-evaluating your limitations.
How am I missing out?
Most if not all of those companies are uninteresting to me.
And I don't think any of them would shy away from hiring me for my lack of experience with azure / ms tech. They might not hire me for other reasons but that would not be one of the reasons.