Not everything you wrote makes sense, but I'd like to address some of your concerns. :)
They make a USB version for purchase in the store.
Having used Ubuntu for awhile now I really appreciate the Apple way of doing things. A few complaints about ubuntu:
- when the version of my four day old local copy of the repository was not correct, the GUI offered no help, it just wouldn't work;
- the GUI for apt-get doesn't let me refresh the local copy of the repository, forcing me to us the CLI, sigh;
I'm not sure what you mean by the GUI for apt-get. Ubuntu doesn't strictly have one of these although it has a few programs which fill the role: Ubuntu Software Center, Update Manager, and Synaptic. Ubuntu Software Center doesn't have a way to update the repository listings but Ubuntu will check for updates once a day if you're on the Internet so this should be automatic. That's not to say the feature wouldn't be useful. The other two programs have fairly clear methods for updates. I'd argue that Synaptic is the true front end for apt-get, and it's very comprehensive.
- the Ubuntu package manager is crustier than the Mac package manager, i.e. the apt-get for unison is way out of date, the Mac Ports version is newer;
This has nothing to do with the package manager but with the Ubuntu repositories. This is probably something that can be fixed in in Debian and Ubuntu. It is annoying how some software lags behind. Sometimes PPAs (personal package archives) that individuals add can help with this but these can be risky as they aren't vetted like the rest of the OS.
As for sshd, it doesn't enable remote root access by password as Ubuntu ships with no root password.
GUIs for server daemons aren't unified because you can pick your favorite software package and use it. This gives you more power and choice with the drawback of needing to know how each package works. I disagree with your premise that a [system services configuration] GUI that doesn't support every possible package just shouldn't be shipped. I think it makes more sense to start with core functionality that's stable, ship what you have, and improve it rather than not ship or work on something at all. If the GUI tool proves unsuitable for your purposes, then it's easily ignored until such time as it is.
The "Ubuntu GUI" is more of a way to use the standard desktop stuff, not to administer a server. So unless you're referring to server administration tools specifically, I'm not sure I agree with your opinion that Ubuntu would be better off as a CLI-only OS.