@eamon @neauoire
Well said!
Like, "Here's a #BSD. You may or may not even get a GUI, but everything is beautifully documented and fairly understandable."
Vs, "Here's a Linux. It's got a gorgeous interface hiding a eldritch horror of corporate-spewed components and dozens of millions of lines of code complexity."
Disclaimer: I use, daily-drive, and love Linux. Some days, I just want to use the pretty GUI and not worry about the underparts. But the underparts are there, and getting more complex and unwieldy by the hour.
Another example: look at the Harrier "Jump Jet" vs. the F-35.
The Harrier's RCS (reaction control system) is very simple, just a series of jet exhaust ports directly linked (hydraulically??) to the main yoke. The F-35 is an incredibly complex system of avionics.
I'm not saying that an F-35 could vertically land an F-35 or anything silly like that, but it's an order of magnitude easier to fly (AIUI) than the Harrier, which requires constant input from the pilot.
So often, simplicity and elegance in the system (e.g., Harrier, BSD) is inversely linked to external/surface ease-of-use (e.g., F-35, Linux).
(If anyone is familiar with the F-35 or Harrier and would like to correct any factual errors (considering my understanding of those systems are less than surface/casual), I would absolutely appreciate it)