The problem is that you have different goals within the same requirements.
>home, office, enterprise
They can be very different.
Office could be either the same as a home user, with a few more accounts or it could be a a lot of servers with many clients and many services.
Now you can make a GUI that is usable for the majority of the worlds population, and that might be very suitable for the home user.
Freedombox tries to achieve this.
You can also make a GUI that makes it usable for the enterprise, controlling a lot of systems.
Opensuse tries to achieve this.
With that said, using a text based interface is a lot better for most server related tasks, as physical access is undesirable and it is a lot less data to transmit text. (which makes it better for slow internet connections, encryption etc).
>teach people over the phone.
Or you could just use ssh.
My grandmother uses ubuntu to make photoalbums and browse the internet.
She doesn't use the terminal, she doesn't even speak english.
When she has a task she wants to do, she asks me how, I write a script, add it to a menu and then it is a clickable action.
If something doesn't work, I either ssh into her computer or fix it next time I see her.
My tech support is near zero now.
As for distro maintenance, you can almost pick whatever you want here.
Debian, ubuntu, opensuse, core os, fedora, arch, gentoo and slackware are all able to fit this.
As for drivers, what is not currently working as you think they should?
Graphic cards? I mean if your server utilizes a lot of graphic cards then wouldn't it make sense to research what cards can do the job?
Or are you saying that graphic cards in general are not good enough, so you wouldn't use it on your desktop?
Either way, I don't see how OSX does any better.
There the hardware is even more limiting.
It is against their terms to install it on more powerful hardware and they never update their hardware or adjust prices.
