If you do one thing over and over again, then an intuitive UI with informative notes is unnecessary, but to classify those of us who have to use multiple systems with multiple applications to accomplish various tasks as "average users" is demeaning. A good UI benefits users at all levels.

Your attitude is the reason that even IT professionals (like myself) tend to leave Linux for their Apache and MySQL servers. For day to day computing the Windows or Mac UIs and applications are more productive because of things like "informative notes".

I think it came out the "wrong way" (not native english speaking person behind the keyboard here)

Well since the topic was Ipad and magic, I took it as the "magic" was how easy people started liking apple´s approach to UI design on mobile devices and how tons of people around me repeats all day long "damn it´s so easy and understandable, it´s just amazing" compared to me ranting how nice it is it is with X-Terminal and all the tweaking that can be done, they just see "the magic".

My intention was in no way meant to sound demeaning and I would say it´s a far stretch to call any normal random Linux skilled person "average users" when it comes to computer skills

Pretty sure you would beat my tiny skills easy but I´m a quick learner haha!

So sorry if it came out that way.
It´s hard sometimes to express oneself sometimes and things get missread due to crippled language skills.

I complete agree. However, I don't think it HAS to be an either/or type relationship. I think what's brilliant about Apple's desktop OS is that, although they have the nice interface for the everyday user (and that's probably more than 90% of computer users), there is an underlying Unix system that more advanced users can use. Its really the best of both worlds, 'magic' and 'power'.

It may be easier for Apple, who long has been catering to artists and everyday users, to move to a system that gives more power to the user, than it is for Linux to start catering to the everyday user.

N900 is awesome for me, since i am in research. For a phone, even i want simplicity to use. What if the iPhone suddenly exposes a unix terminal window? That would be pretty awesome (for the iphone, i mean, not for the N900 ).

I have a fiber optic internet line to my house. It's certainly been fast using IE or Firefox on Windows XP... but one day I booted to Ubuntu and fired up its version of Firefox, and all I could say was WOW. Blazing speed.

So I'm with you on this one.

If there is an interest and clear intention of moving the Linux(/FOSS) 'mainstream', IMHO the first thing that has to be overcome is the understanding of what being mainstream means and what values are there to the general Linux movement and its community.

Otherwise, the constant elitist attitude will continue to be a big stumbling block in moving forward, especially in identifying good concepts to follow or emulate. (no, I don't think it's in anyone's best interest to convert every computer users to emacs nor vi(m)).

The first thing that should be repeated as a mantra is "Care about your users".

Sometimes I get the impression that since some people suffered pains in order to learn how to use a computer, they think others should do too...

Interesting thread.

As a 10+ years GNU+Linux user and 5+ years distro developer and an IT professional. I can say the following:

a) UIs are great if you have a way to fallback to editing a config file.

Let me expand on that point. I've tended quite a few windows systems and frankly they all suffered from this one simple core issue. Often I found myself trying to figure something out and not being able to do so because I couldn't understand what an option did. It wasn't mentioned anywhere, undocumented and so on. Most software I've used on GNU+Linux systems had complete basic documentation of options and some even had a lot more than just basic. This always made it easy for me to understand what the software was doing and what I needed to do. Yes some things can be checked in the registry but that is overkill for something as simple as a config file. And before everyone jumps on the not well documented. A lot of times the config options in the config file are self explaining while what you see in an UI at times isn't.

b) Everything has an UI, but not all UIs are well designed

Yes every app you ever launched has an UI. Be it a command line app, text UI, GUI etc... Those are all UIs. Remember it means User Interface. Yes even a config file is an UI. And yes even those can be badly designed.

c) Elitism

No it's not about the attitude. Just because some people prefer a different workflow does not make them elitist. Else all the Outlook crowd is elitist as well. We each have our own workflows(some of which haven't been completly worked out yet, some of which are good where they stand etc...). I've tried a lot of tools for my own workflow over the years. And am still lacking some tools. But here are my reasons for using some:
Alpine - it's a no-nonsense mail client for me, it only handles a single message at a time for reading/replying/composing/etc.. I like it that way it means I can concentrate on that single message and put some effort into it. I see so many Outlook users have 20 different messages open at the same time and never taking the time to respond to them properly. The amount of typoed emails I recieve from such people is incledible. Sometimes I wonder if they ever actually went to school(and no, not even a spell checker helps there).

So yeah nothing else than the workflow matters. For some people that workflow is handled best with Windows, some Mac and some something else. I couldn't get my own workflow going on Windows and haven't tried with Mac simply because the cost is to high.

d) "magic" - there is no magic... there is no single magic bullet.

Each person will have their own wants, desires, etc... Some can and will adapt their workflow to existing tools, some(what most people call advancade users/power users etc) will adapt the tools to their workflow. I belong in the second category. The computer is a tool meant to make my life easier not something I need to adapt my life TO. I see a lot of people adapting themselves to the computer instead of adapting the computer to their needs. And I can understand that some just want to get on with their work even if it means their workflow might suffer here and there. Maybe some day they'll learn to adapt the tool to their workflow maybe not. But I'm sure if everyone learned to adapt the tools to their needs(and no I'm not talking coding here) most people would become aware of why some tools are less than ideal for their needs.

Just my 0.02€ why GNU+Linux doesn't really need any extra magic. It has it. It's the users that lack interest into it.

That's gorgeous. Where can I get that list app? Pretty please?

Interesting thread, I think I'll just be replicating things that were already said, but here goes anyways...

This is a great point... I think this might be where the worlds of Unix/Linux and Apple/Windows do not agree.

I would propose that 90%+ of computer users in the world do not want to see a text file, or would want to edit it even if it were there.

Example, I use Mac and Windows for graphical art and music, where you deal with huge data files, and typically there are no text files to be found (unless I am writing plug-ins). E.g., Maya, 3DSMax, Photoshop, Cakewalk... I do not see it as a limitations, and rather a strength... the only time I really want to see a text file is if I am writing software. The text files would be much to large to be meaningful without visual/audio feedback, and would be inefficient to even deal with in your day-to-day work flow.

It might be just my impression... I actually notice hard to use GUIs on Unix/Linux software more-so than other OS's. On my Linux Ubuntu box, I hardly ever use any GUIs, except for web-browsing.

I have a theory that many Linux software are wrappers/glue between other libraries and command-line programs much more so than on Windows/Apple (except now Apple has a lot of open-source projects, but i mean traditional Apple products for media arts). Perhaps interfaces are built bottom up on Linux (considering what tools can do the job to provide the functionality), rather than top-down in the GUI-only operating systems (first considering the high level use-cases and interfaces, which lead into requirements, which lead into design...).

Nope, they're just *****s (sorry, but I hate programs that pervert internet standards with a passion, all microsoft software is perverting them but outlook is the worst offender, and people using it are either ignorant, stupid, arrogant or, 99% of cases, all of the above . In a word, *****s).