If DNN is advertised or marketed as a site builder, it would a lot more users, specially the non technical ones. These users do not need to know how to install it or develop for it in able to use it to create sites. But I understand the corp probably doesn't want to go that route because it might lessen the sophistication image of DNN and its ability it to push through enterprises with support.
and people are arguing it's not a CMS. "Sitebuilder" and "CMS" are common terms. If we use other terms then DNN will be cornered into a specific niche and unable to attract the same audience that are going to Drupal, Wordpress, Joomla.. etc. The average web user doesn't know or cares about what platform it uses. All it matters is if it's easy to use, reliable and flexible, it will attract a lot more users. I don't even know what language WordPress uses but I know it's very popular.
If DNN is advertised an an Application Framework, it will attract mainly the geeks. Facebook developers are a tiny tiny fraction of its 170 million users.
DNN really needs more visibility and by starting with the UI, that's what the user first sees, the first impression is hard to ignore. I will repeat what I said in my original post. We need more draggy droppy features even if it does something really simple (and silly in the eyes of the developers) the average user will be happy, fewer postbacks and nice juicy shiny icons. These are simple additions which do not require major redesigns.