You only get an icon for a graphical programme. If the programme runs
from a terminal, you won't get an icon. Make sure that you know if the programme
is graphical, if you expect it to be so, when you install it. There is a mixture
in the repos as many users still like the commandline interface.

pangaeapaul: And for that matter, when I do find something that's
supposed to be an executable, why doesn't it run? Hasn't Linux ever
heard of the 'double-click' ?

GNOME uses the double click by default and KDE uses single click, although that
is not what you meant, but just thought I would point it out.

Executables in Linux are handled differently. There is no equivalent of the exe
or com found in DOS. Instead files are made executable through their properties.
However, making them execute does not always work because they weren't made to
execute and produce any result. Some bin files can be executable or made to
execute, but they are the exception rather than the rule. Linux relies heavily
upon scripting due to its efficiency. Scripts are usually launched from the
commandline.

There are two types of Linux files that will execute when you double or single
click on them. They are DEBs (for Debian derivatives, such as Ubuntu) and RPMs
(for RedHat derivatives such as Fedora). One is not compatible with the other
type, but one can be converted to the other.

However, like with Windows having an executable file is no guarantee that it is
any good. In Windows using a poorly made programme can cause your system to
become unstable and crash. The same can be true for Linux. If you use the wrong
DEB or RPM for your version, it is likely to not install or if it does it could
cause problems down the road. In the worst case it could make your computer
unstable, but in most instances it causes a dependency problem that may prevent
you from installing some programmes, later.

With Linux the emphasis is on security. You cannot change the properties unless
you have permission to do so. Executing a binary file is usually disallowed.
However, some forms of Linux such as Xandros have adopted the Windows laissez
faire approach and my eeePC with Xandros came with no password or login screen
and you can launch Synaptic without a password. This leaves most Linux users
aghast. I could not believe it when it first happened.

Linux wins every year in contests to breach built in out of the box security
that pits Linux against Vista and OS/X (three out of three years). It is because
they take security seriously. Things may seem strange to an outsider, but a
Linux user would not have it any other way.

If you expect, Linux to behave like Windows, it won't. It is an old operating
system. It is based on UNIX which is pre-Windows. All of the things that seem so
foreign to us are old hat to UNIX users. That is just the way things were meant
to be for them. With Windows, the GUI was built on top of DOS. The way they do
things such as having exes, coms and bats was determined a long time ago.
Windows and Linux have different heritages and it is too late to second guess
now as both are too firmly entrenched. Never the twain shall meet. That is just
the way things are.

Get used to it or not is the only choice you have. That is why I said that
learning Linux is easy. It is the forgetting Windows that is hard. It is just a
matter of perspective. If you want to learn, then throw out your old
preconceived notions and you will have success. Hold onto them and you will find
it difficult to learn, as one can interfere with the other, unless you keep them
compartmentalized.