Some software manuals simply tell you what each function does, some also include what the function is for, and if you have nothing to do for several weeks you can learn all you need from the latter. Better manuals tell you how to do many common tasks, but it is difficult to anticipate every task that may be required.
The other half of what is going on is that when you install new software or hardware using Windows, it works more often than not, even if you are not an expert. Generally the program automatically recognises the hardware, and you don't need to know very much at all.
Equally, the file system is superficially more comprehensible. Directories called "My Documents" while a little twee, do convey their intended function. Not so with Linux. I had to search for some time to find an exposition of the various directory structures, and I still don't have it completely clear in my mind.
To work with something beyond following a few instructions by rote, it is useful to have a mental picture or story that describes the machinery in useful terms. For Windows, users don't care abvout binary or magnetisation of bits of hard disc. The rarely know about the FAT. But a picture of files and directories, almost like a filing cabinet, maps well enough to what the system does for it to be useful.
I could give more examples, but I hope that this illustrates the point I am trying to make: that a description from which the user could build a mental model would be helpful for people to use Linux as a tool rather than as an end in itself. To attract Windows users, it should probably start from the Windows mindset, for example: In Windows you do this by the following method . .because . . .but in Linux . . .