If you went and read Linus' rant, then you'll find you are actually reinforcing his argument. He says that except for a handful of edge use-cases, there will be no demand for massively parallel in end user usage and that we shouldn't waste time that could be better spent optimizing the low-core processes.
The CAD, video and HTPC use-cases are already solved by the GPU architecture and don't need to be re-solved by inefficient CPU algorithms.
Your Linux workstation would be a good example, but is a very low user count requirement and can be done at the compiler level and not the core OS level anyway.
Your Linux gaming machine shouldn't be doing more than 3/4 cores of CPU and handing the heavy grunt work off to the GPU anyway. No need for a 64 core CPU for that one.
Redesigning what we're already doing successfully with a low number of controller/data shifting CPU cores managing a large bank of dedicated rendering/physics GPU cores and task-specific ASICs for things like 10GB networking and 6GB IO interfaces is pretty pointless, which is what Linus is talking about, not that we only need 4 cores and nothing else.