The point being that the author isn't looking for solutions, but rather just wants to bitch?
Seems that the peasants who have binaries should use rsync manually, instead of expecting tools to do the job.
Although, complaining about Ubuntu not doing things the way they "should" is more valid, since Ubuntu is targeted at everyone. :)
Why? The author of a piece of software is under no obligation to satisfy the expectations of its incidental users, especially if he's not selling it to them.
Secondly, in what crazy alternate universe can git, which is given to you free as in libre as well as beer, be compared with IE? If you think git sucks, but still want to use it for some crazy reason, go ahead and modify it to suit your needs.
Lastly, I cannot imagine a world where anyone would be forced to have to cater for a VCS the way we have to for browsers. They're simply too different in function. It's not like you're in danger of being forced into the business of implementing a service supporting commits and checkouts for two different types of repositories on the same source files... unless you work at GitHub. Heh.
The problem here is that there are people telling everybody that "git is easy," "everybody should use git," and then every time someone raises a concern someone brings up the argument above. I wonder, what is your goal? Are you trying to get people who "don't get it" to stop using git? Do you think killing discussions about it will further progress? Are you afraid the interface you learned might change?
The creators of git have created/are creating a modern changeset management tool which, yes, you will have to learn to use effectively. This is a good thing.
Not spending time on completely learning how to deal with an inferior (imo) tool, gives me more time to learn things which matter to me. So it's the exact opposite of "learnt nothing".