It seems to me that the only way you get a seamless experience with an OS install is if the hardware vendor has carefully tested and tuned the OS configuration for that specific piece of hardware. Apple does this, and even they aren't flawless.
It seems to me that the only way you get a seamless experience with an OS install is if the hardware vendor has carefully tested and tuned the OS configuration for that specific piece of hardware. Apple does this, and even they aren't flawless.
And if you have to go to the "very thorough OpenBSD documentation" just to configure basic desktop setup, then no, it doesn't "just work". You shouldn't need to go to documentation to set things like timezone or user/pass, so why is documentation mentioned for a "just works" install?
The timezone and a default user can be created during installation, however yes, it is perfectly acceptable to expect that a user is capable of reading documentation.
Hmm. I was trying to be snarky there, but now that I think about it, it might not be so far off the mark...
That said, there are several OSes out there that have plenty of users who never read the docs for using it. Android, iOS, OSX, and Windows all have teeming masses of people who are able to use them adequately without reading documentation (just ask someone who's worked a support desk).
Get the vendors to make wifi firmware freely redistributable (or even better, fully open source + build instructions) and it will work out of the box.
hell, vendors can't even be bothered to use consistent chipsets from one shipment of product to the next. The Linux community are left with checking serial numbers or product skus and maintaining wiki sites with cross-referenced tables that tell us if a given product is known to work or not. That's the world of Linux webcams and wifi.
Sadly, if there were more Linux desktops the vendors would take more care. Until the vendors take more care there won't be mainstream Linux desktop adoption.