I used DOS back in the early 90's, got fairly comfortable with computing from the command line.
Then, as I needed to run certain programs, I reluctantly went along to Windows 95 and 98, and finally XP.
While I am not afraid of the command line, and know how to use it, and there are ways of using it,
I have never needed to use it since using Windows... nothing absolutely FORCES me to go to the command line.
But even Linux Mint, the friendliest Linux version forces me to go to the command line... oh... maybe 3 or 4 times a year.
And I do it because I'm familiar with the idea of typing in commands precisely AND my typing skills are pretty good.
BUT Terminal in Linux is a LOT more complex and a lot less intuitive than DOS.
Anyway, if Linux terminal has ME sweating bullets 4 times a year, and I had that DOS experience and am good at typing
(and actually languages in general), I can only believe that for the average Windows user, if they experienced any of the times that Linux has forced me to use terminal, they would NOT have the ability to cope with it. For THEM, it would be broken... a showstopper that would make them go back to Windows or buy a Mac... OR... if they were a friend or family member I set up with Linux, call me over to their house to work for free on their computer.
If I'm going over to their house trying to clean a virus off their Windows computer, or if I'm going to their house installing something with on Linux terminal, if they need me for anything after installation, it's broken. Actually, if they need me FOR installation, it's broken.
Maybe not as badly broken as Windows, but still broken. If no one needs to use terminal or needs my help, then really, there is NO LIMIT to the numbers of Linux Mint disks I could pass out. If all of them are going to come back to me wanting help, at some point, it puts a ceiling on how many I can distribute, because at some point I'll be having too many people asking for computer help. Well, someone might say, you could CHARGE them for the help. Well, then, really what's the difference between a Windows consultant who makes a living off of what's broken with Windows, and a Linux consultant who makes a living off of the things that are broken with Linux?
Among other things someone who is making a living off of the fact that an OS is broken isn't going to be motivated to help FIX what is broken.