To me, it depends on what kind of user we're talking about.
GNU/Linux is reliable, but not so much (in comparison) if you don't know what
you're doing.
The downside of its flexibility is that it's a bit easier to break. Other
than that, it's know to be as solid/reliable as it gets.
My (subjective) perception is that I sometimes read that "some" people have
their GNU/Linux suddenly not booting anymore (sure, we don't know what they
did as root).
I've personally have broken the desktop bar in my first use of Trisquel.
Unfortunately, I can't remember how I did that, but it shouldn't be possible
ideally.
It's typical to be able to add bars and remove them, but for new and/or not
computing-saavy users,
I'd stick with a rock solid bar that can't be suppressed easily, but can be
moved around, hidden, things like that.
Widows for example had its share of unreliability/limitations etc.
But following on the desktop bar example, it's extremely unlikely to break it
or remove it.
Very limited flexibility, but a more idiot-proof GUI.
It doesn't need another layer of sudo, just not making those personalization
features as accessible.
Of course it's probably difficult to manage so many different pieces of
software that way. But to me it's still a good idea.
Again, it's my subjective point of view/short experience,
and I'd rather go through a steeper learning curve than go back in my golden
cage anyway. I can't unsee it anymore.
