I agree with _almost_ everything in the last post. The only thing I don't agree with is that "apt-get not too shabby, but needs work". What exactly do you think should be improved with apt-get?

I don't think it gets much easier than
apt-get update
apt-get install <app>
apt-get remove <app>

This is something that gets banged on about in all sorts of comparsions, but really the installer packages in Windows are not that great. I have _many_ times found myself uninstalling an application in W2K only for the uninstall to tell me that "some elements have not been removed and will have to be removed manually". Admittedly it does have a [details] button that I can press and then write down the 100 things it didn't get around to deleting. Then there is the registry, try finding out if your app really did uninstall itself correctly, or do you have a ton of keys in there as residual damage.

For very high end commercial packages in Windows then the installer/remover does mostly work, but I wouldn't say it's easier/better than apt-get. Shareware and otherware products have a very high diversity in their ability to follow installer guidelines.

BTW if the only thing that annoys about apt-get is the fact its a command line then go to a command line once (as root) and type:

apt-get update
apt-get install synaptic
synaptic &

and away you go. Better than add/remove programs as it includes copious filtering capability.

Can someone give me hand down from this high horse now?

;>