On a side note, regarding Cisco (specifically Linksys), I'm not sure that following a company that can produce something as idiotic as router requiring internet access for administration / first time setup is necessarily such great idea. Because clearly, they too are capable of doing something stupid.
Yes, that was one of the worst ideas ever.
I would say that comparing ROS to (Cisco) IOS (let's use technology names here) is much more appropriate comparison than comparing ROS to LinksysOS. Sure, Linksys originally did (and might still for all I know) use Linux kernel, just like ROS. The Mikrotik platform, though, is all about unlocking the full power of the Linux kernel's networking stack and the very common services that support it (dhcpd, routing, http proxy, etc) while the Linksys OS is all about making networking easier.
ROS is more like IOS because both aim to enable as much advanced functionality as possible, and to do it with as much efficiency and reliability as possible. The fact that ROS happens to be two orders of magnitude cheaper on hardware is a happy bonus.
ROS makes advanced networking accessible to everyone by lowering costs - whereas Linksys makes networking more accessible by limiting choices to the most common features, and having all defaults set to something that you could just unwrap and plug into a lot of places and it would just work. You don't have to know what OSI layer 4 is to set up a NAT pinhole in Linksys - and that's a good thing.
Yes, Mikrotik developed the Quick Set tool - and there are things about it that I like, but in general, It's not useful to me (it's broken my router a couple of times when I wasn't careful) - but in the end, RouterOS is a powerful platform that can intimidate someone who's new to networking, and allow all kinds of crazy "crimes against nature" solutions to things, created by people who haven't had the experience to learn networking best practices. (Just look at how often people post to these forums asking how to make a NAT pinhole).
IOS is the same way. So that's why the two are compared and not ROS vs. Linksys.
ROS vs Linksys is like comparing a hotrod muscle car with no features against a luxury sedan.
You don't want an air conditioner in your drag racer, and you don't want nitrous oxide injection in your stretched limo.
Thus - it's (in my not-unique opinion) better that Mikrotik spend their energy creating more networking functionality / improving what already exists, than to add print server functionality. To me, this would be like the highway department being responsible for building a gas station.