Date: Wed, 16 May 2001 11:30:07 -0400 From: Shannon Hendrix <shannon@widomaker.com> To: David Johnson <djohnson@acuson.com> Cc: tlambert2@mindspring.com, freebsd-newbies@FreeBSD.ORG, freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: I'm leaving Message-ID: <20010516113005.A16585@widomaker.com> In-Reply-To: <3B01767A.1C24A9D7@acuson.com>; from djohnson@acuson.com on Tue, May 15, 2001 at 11:33:30AM -0700 References: <002b01c0db54$e0febaa0$5599ca3f@disappointment> <20010513171444.E26123@welearn.com.au> <00f401c0db7e$ff3ca2a0$fe00a8c0@kat.lan> <20010513122623.I97034@lpt.ens.fr> <20010513033434.A54250@xor.obsecurity.org> <3B001679.3172B050@acuson.com> <3B00E4F6.10DC397D@mindspring.com> <3B01767A.1C24A9D7@acuson.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Tue, May 15, 2001 at 11:33:30AM -0700, David Johnson wrote: > Joe Average doesn't have to do any of that crap for Windows, because his > computer manufacturer has done it for him already. His idea of _Sometimes_ that is true. But even if he has to install Windows, it does everything for you. Yeah, it does all kinds of things you probably don't want, but that's not the point, and would only be one of many failings of MessOS from Micros~1. > "installation" is handing his credit card over to the cashier. FreeBSD > is already *easier* to install than Windows. It only seems harder > because it doesn't come preinstalled with your new machine. That's a matter of opinion of course. Windows installs on my system are basically: insert CD, wait, reboot and install Gran Prix Legends. Now, getting Windows trimmed of all the useless subprocesses and other crap that slow the machine to a crawl... *THAT* is difficult, no doubt about it. But we're just talking about the install here, not stupidity-removal. > Speaking of partitioning, compare the FreeBSD fdisk to the Windows > fdisk... The user installing Windows never has to see fdisk at all. Of course, I hate that because I don't like one-huge drive installs. In this area, there is little sense in comparing FreeBSD to Windows. > And there have been many times when I wished Windows had a non-graphical > login. Like those times that Windows won't boot up because the video > isn't configured right, and I can't configure the video right because I > can't boot up Windows... Hold F8 when booting. Then you get either a command line or a safe-mode GUI where you can fix your problem. It's pretty trivial... :) But I know what you mean. Another thing I hate to see in UNIX installation and configuration software is not also providing a command-line alternative. Another problem is that wrapper-type programs are often a license to create incredibly obtuse and syntactially stupid configuration files that are difficult to edit. > The biggest attraction of FreeBSD and other unices is the control the > user has over the system. Much of this control comes through choice. If > you eliminate this choice you destroy the control, and FreeBSD loses > it's attraction. If KDE is to be the mandatory desktop, then the GNOME [snip] I don't think anyone is suggesting a mandatory desktop. You can use KDE or Gnome software to do the install without making it the desktop default. If someone _was_ saying this should be mandatatory, then no, that's not a good idea. Most Linux systems let you pick which desktop you want. It's just a little slicker than FreeBSD, which also does much the same thing. I think just creating some good packages would be the right first step. Wrapping it up in an easier installer will likely require those kinds of packages anyway, so why not do that first? -- "We have nothing to prove" -- Alan Dawkins To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20010516113005.A16585>