I find I wasn't quite clear enough before hitting post :-)
"usable and workmanlike looking" is the part I was suggesting is supplied by designer/analyst types, and often missing in FOSS projects, because it's not "essential to the base function".
A current example that's driving me insane is Knetworkmanager, as supplied with SuSE 11.0, which I run on my laptop. The Right Way to handle this stuff has been pretty obvious for some time -- supplied, embarassingly enough, by Windows XP... though it often can't keep the links *running* to save its life.
But KNM makes me jump though some non-obvious hoops to get anything done, having to know that I must choose "New Connection" in order to teach it about a network I've never been on before, and having to suffer through a popup menu that completely fills the screen of already learned networks when *none of them are in range*... and which is *in the way* of the other menu as I scroll up to do the thing I actually need to do.
That's the sort of three-click-problem items he was talking about, IMO.
And the simple fact of the matter is that while I could probably contribute to fixing them, the amount of time I have available to deal with the 30 or 40 such things that make it difficult for me to use SuSE/KDE3 on a daily basis limited to "I might hang a ticket, if I don't have to fight to find and sign up for your tracker". And what I *get*, in a lot of cases is "we look forward to your patch".
I've *read* "Smart Questions".
I submit that while I understand -- and even approve of -- the arguments it makes, *that's the difference we're talking about*. If you want Real People to *want* to use your stuff, then *someone* has to deal with those issues.