There's a difference between an OS that can be cus...

There's a difference between an OS that can be customized, but doesn't need to be, and an OS that requires customization. There exists a middle ground, where defaults provide ease of use, but other options are still there. Ubuntu is the prime example of it. There is lots you can do to configure it. Just because you don't have to right off the bat to get it working doesn't mean you can't.

Why do people think that censorship and restriction come with ease of use. iPhone is easy to use. iPhone is restricted. They are two independent concepts, and I have faith that the FOSS community can find one without the other.

Also, drop this idea that there's some "Linux" body. There are distros for a reason: different people want different stuff. Some people want to see the widespread proliferation of FOSS, and for that to happen, ease of use is a must. Some people want to have an OS that is ultra-powerful and uber-customizeable. That is good, but will never lead to a mainstream linux.

So, we have different distros that reflect different niches, different desires and different attitudes. So if you want the Gentoo customization attidue, stop complaining about Ubuntu and go use gentoo, and if you want ease of use, go use Ubuntu and stop complaining about how Gentoo is hard to use. At the end of the day, what matters is that it's free and open, and there's something out there for everyone.