Going back to where this all started, I wonder if we aren't all talking out of our collective backsides. We all seem to be implicitly accepting that GNU/Linux is in some way inferior to Windows WRT the average non-technical user.
When the average non-computer literate person buys a PC from PC World (spit!), etc., it comes off the shelf, set up and ready to run. They take it home plug it in and start the painful process of leaning what it's all about (or not, as the case may be).
Now I suspect that if these systems where preloaded with Knoppix, Morphix or something similar then it wouldn't make a jot of difference to them. Remember they are starting from a position of very little or no knowledge anyway.
Having spent the last 2 days setting up a W2K based computer from scratch I am now of the opinion that setting up say Debian is no more difficult and requires about the same amount of technical knowledge, in fact, in some respects for an experienced technical person I think a reasonable GNU/Linux distro would be easier.
If someone runs into an installation problem when loading either a Windows or GNU/Linux application IME it's no easier or harder to resolve for the average non-techie user.
The bonus for a technical person is that if they need to diagnose such a problem then, with GNU/Linux, they can look under the covers at the code.
So I would say, the next time someone tells you that GNU/Linux is inherently more complex or harder to use or set up and maintain than Windows or is simply a command line system, your reply should be "Bollocks!, Prove it!".
Regards,
Keith ____________ A bump in the road is either an obstacle to be fought or an opportunity to be enjoyed... it is all up to you.