I am afraid this sort of thing brings out the worst in me. The implication is that Linux doesn't move with the times and is only accessible to a very small percentage of the population?

I found it impossible until about Fedora 4 and even then I had help from an expert at work. And even then I found configuring some of the hardware a bit of a challenge. And the repos weren't as fully featured so it was rpmfind or pbone to get the rpms and then search around for dependencies. And weren't there 2 conflicting repos for Fedora? Linva and another one.

[sarcasm on] my non computer literate pals could barely restrain themselves [sarcasm off]

I now know enough to get by without a desktop on my server but I do like a GUI interface for day to day stuff. I am also happy that the nature of Linux has seen Debian spawn Ubuntu which in turn has spawned Mint and all the while non computer literate people have a doorway into Linux. And the doorway is getting bigger.

Rant over

:D Hilarious :D

I feel I'm more of an expert than most. I have no problem using Ubuntu because it gets me to getting work done as fast as possible. I agree with frankbell on his assessment that regardless of the distro you can still get to a terminal, compile, and have what you want. Linux work is my primary form of income. I like it when Linux gets out of my way. It has gotten real good at that.

I don't think Linux is getting or trying to be like Windows I just think it's getting and trying to be better.
Yes, it can be fun to compile things (I'll occasionally compile my own kernel, though I do do it the easy Debian way) and I've compiled a few other bits and pieces along the way but I like my OS to work well and Linux does. If you're spending all your time compiling things just to get a desktop environment you're not using your new SDR (in my case) or making music (in a friend's) or just posting on here or whatever else it is you do.

OSS = Open Source Software
 

In this context, OSS is clearly Open Source Software.
Perhaps I should have used FOSS, from the WIKIPEDIA page on Free and Open Source Software: Frankly, it does not have to be Free (as in $0 cost to the end user) to enhance freedom. Software that make people free meets a certain standard, and responds to a certain value, that pervades this community.

yeah well that is a status quo is it not?

You're not suppose to run a server with a GUI! yells the man who you have no idea who he is.

Why not? NT server has a GUI, Linux itself is already a server that most people are not aware of. Apache ftp... I have apache and a ftp server installed and running on my laptop even. Linux is a one in all OS.

To not have a GUI Server is just silly, I understand if you got a rack system with a bunch of them hooked together ok...to have a monitor for each and every one of them becomes expensive and space consuming so using a command line with one monitor connected to one server that can get a hold of the rest of them will suffice.

but no gui on a personal server?

who was the one that desided that that has to be the status quo for people that run Linux, that if they use a GUI interphase on their server they just ain't one of the cool kids?

A GUI on a production server is a waste of resources and introduces more packages and processes meaning the attack surface is larger. That's why "no GUI on a server". If you understand that and know how to mitigate it I don't think anyone will criticise. Similarly if you're running server processes on a desktop or a home machine.
"no GUI on a server" is a concept even Microsoft get behind and makes a lot of sense -- as you mention when looking after a group of servers using the GUI on each isn't the usual method anyhow.
Another reason people say "no GUI on a server" is that there is no need for it in the majority of use cases. Again, if it's a server process on a desktop that's another story. A dedicated server doesn't need a GUI as it doesn't have any uses.

thanks, but Like I said for the average joe, or sally a personal server usally equates to his desktop located somewhere in his or her house.

He or she will still have or should learn how to use the command line to malnipute and maintain their said server. But to make themselves go out and buy another PC just to have a deadecated server in there house for use. unless they are running a major Web Site or something like amazon or E bay out of there house.

I don't see the harm in using the PC for both a server and there every day PC. It is not actually a needed necessity if all they are doing is using it for a personal bloging sight they can put out into the web. So they can actually have more control over its contents.

It is theirs they can put what ever they want on it, within their countries laws or not. As the saying goes, "it is not against the law if you don't get caught."

For the every day Linux user, most should, in my option, install Apache and ftp servers on there system and learn them. Why not, it is something Linux can do.

as far as resoures go, most people in an advarage day do not put a tremendous load on there laptops or desktops just surfing the net, and posting blogs, facebook, and questions to LQ and such.

so to tell themselves they have to run the server they'd like to set up without a GUI, is to me not actually a necessity.

The most they should concern themselves with is the knowleadge behind the why, as you explained, and allow themselves to become comfortable with the command line to get the server to do everything it is they need it to do.

A terminal emulator will suffice in that scenario.

they, if they like, could even build raid systems to the server. But they do not have to take on the attitude I cannot have a GUI attached to my server, in order for them to learn how to run a server using their home computer and Linux.

Yes, I agree. That was the part I mentioned that if somebody is "...running a server process on a desktop PC that's another story...".
My point being that the "no GUI on a server" idea is for dedicated servers usually in a production environment where the GUI is a waste of resources and a widening of the attack surface. I think it is usually stated because many people are used to Microsoft's Windows servers which, until relatively recently, all had GUIs and it is stated in order for them to rethink what a server is.
I haven't seen any posts here or anywhere else suggesting that one should "never under any circumstances run a GUI on a server" (though, of course, there probably are people posting such garbage) just that on a dedicated server a GUI is usually at best pointless and at worst sub-optimal.

OK so we're basicly argreeing to agree ~ and ~ that's not even a 21 century catch phrase.

Indeed.:hattip: [I like that catchphrase]
I was merely attempting to point out why "no GUI on a server" is worth mentioning.

while I was pointed more twoards the other side of the equation. It is ok to have a GUI on a Linux server for the general population of the average Joe or Sally's personal comptuer.

same book, just a different page is all. ;)

I think anybody using a server falls outside of the "average joe, or sally" range of people. To me using a central home server with a GUI doesn't make sense because you wouldn't be accessing it most of the time. I run one and it is configured for automatic monitoring and text notifications. Also, no GUI!

Back on topic, I think Linux becoming more friendly is not a "Windows" trait. It's simply a natural progression of software. If it's not regularly improving then software quickly becomes stagnant and loses a user base. Whether it's a library or a full OS kernel. Keep in mind, Linux is just the kernel. The thousands of other software packages is what provides the software for the majority of users. The whole ecosystem is evolving and distro maintainers simply try to do what most users in the desktop arena want: make it useable and easy as possible. Even distros like arch or Gentoo fall into this category. Make it easy for their users to compile a whole distro from source. If those users didn't want easy they would simply move on to Linux from Scratch.

I need a gui to read my comic book collection. What is the harm in that?

Then I want to watch my antique cartoons from the early 20th century.

Being a Biker. I need some dumb down time sometimes. This geek stuff, answering questions, makes my head hurt.

Agree, people like "instant"or anything that just pops out and boom that's what I wanted. Don't care how the heavy load was done on the background.

Instant, fast, easy for user (hard for developer) but good profit for the company. :)