Date: Wed, 06 Feb 2036 23:13:29 -0800 (PST) From: Simon Shapiro <shimon@simon-shapiro.org> To: Terry Lambert <tlambert@primenet.com> Cc: hackers@FreeBSD.ORG, capriotti@geocities.com, (Tom) <tom@sdf.com> Subject: Re: X based Free installation Message-ID: <XFMail.360206231329.shimon@simon-shapiro.org> In-Reply-To: <199801072126.OAA08825@usr06.primenet.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 07-Jan-98 Terry Lambert wrote: >> How would a graphically install help? I don't think it would in the >> examples you've given. If the CDROM can't be accessed, why would a >> graphical install indicate why, and a non-graphical install not? Why >> would concepts (info and language) displayed in a graphical dialog box >> be >> lessing confusing if those concepts where displayed in a non-graphical >> one? >> >> Don't get stuck in the trap that GUI is better, because. If the >> language is not understandable, it will not become understandable in a >> GUI. > > I like graphical installs because: > > 1) They tend to be procedurally linear. Then write linear character based code. The NOVICE installation of FreeBSD is very linear. I use it for EVERY installation I make. and I have installed FreeBSD more than twice (this week). This still has nothing to do with GUI, and everything to do with matching methdology with intended purpose. i.e. good engineering practice. > Unlike a menu, which you can choose to do out of order, and > maybe forget something or accidently leave it out, when > something is procedurally linear, it forces the person who > is installing to go through the same procedure as all other > people who are doing the install. Last time I checked, Most M$ GUIs are full of menus. Oh, they are Pull-Down menus. So they must not be menus at all. Menus are annoying indeed. BTW, check some old AT&T FMLI applications. Character mode, but not MENU driven. At least the (several large) applications I wrote with this tool. > 2) They tend to hide complexity. Hiding complexity is a decision, not a technology. I can create a hrrendously complex word processor that is all GUI driven, or an exceedingly simple installation procedure that is all character mode. The technology of drawing a symbol on the screen or indicating input has nothing to do with GUI vs. character mode. > Many people call this "dumbing down", which isn't really a > fair call. You can still allow for an "Advanced..." button > to expose additional options. But if you design so that > the "Advanced..." button is not used in the default case, > then you, the designer, have to take into account a lot > of things that you would otherwise force the user to have > to think about. And the user may not be qualified, like > you supposedly are... So? Hide the complexity. Again, FreeBSD Novice installation does an excellent job in bstracting and simplifying. The ONLY ``technical'' area is in disk slicing (fdisk) and partitioning (disklabel). 90% of this mess is EXACTLY due to M$ idiocity in setting up the fdisk partitions. Yet, installing M$ products simply consumes the whole disk. Great! Do the same with FreeBSD. It is doable (Automatic install?). I still prefer to have a unified filesystem and not the archaic and moronic notion of ``drives A: ... Z:. What is the name of the 45th drive? > 3) They tend to make it so you answer questions only once. So is FreeBSD sysinstall. Oh, yes. There is what appears to be a bug, but is really a lousy prompt where one or two selections appear twice. It is not a conceptual difference, just a simple implementation imperfection. > For a network install, it always pisses me off that I have > to set up my network twice... once for the install, and > again for the post-install. If I give a computer some > information, I damn well expect it to remember it for me, > or I would be using 3x5 cards, not a computer. Nonsense. You setup each interface once. Why do it twice? > 4) They "fold" installs for the lowest common denominator. This is an advantage? Again. You are cofusing M$/Intel cartel of Toastering computers with technology. Computers are NOT toasters and thus FreeBSD allows you to actually program this programmable device, rather than treating it as a kitchen appliance. Look at ATM machines. These are Toster'ed computers in character mode. GUI or not, trivializing can be accomplished in many ways. Or, are you referring to the fact that a tiny little (48x48 pixels or less) of SOME printer is superior to the word ``PRINT''? Every time (rarely) I have to sit at a M$ Word sdcreen, staring at the dozens of tiny little fuzzy pictures, I feel more frustrated than if the darn thing would say PRINT TABLE FILE HELP. Humanity (for the most part) abandoned pictographs about 5,000 years ago. The result was a proliferation of writing and knowledge amoung us commoners. > This may seem like a repeat of #2. It's not. #2 hides > _unnecessary_ complexity. Folding also hides _necessary_ > complexity. This is the difference between the Windows 95 > "Default", "Portable", and "Custom" options. Only in the > "custom" case do you even expose non-default possibilities > for even "non-advanced" settings. You ask the minimum > number of procedurally linear questions to get the user > up and running with the default settings. In other words, > "option + next/back/cancel" for all dialogs, with the > smallest possible number of dialogs. > > Now with all this said, it IS possible to make non-graphical installs > that do this. The Windows 3.1 install is a good example. But such > examples do not abound in the real world; they are few and far between. I see the problem. You are confusing implementation and concept. The concepts you describe are (for the most part :-) very sound. Since menus developed after character mode terminals, and ergonomics sometimes after the graphical terminal, you, naturally assocu=iate nasty, obscure, menu driven applications with character mode, and logical, concise applications with GUI. This equation os not nececcerily permanent. > In practice, if you give a programmer the option of doing something > three different ways, then they will make them all work, and you won't > be able to point at any one of them and say with authorit "this is the > one true way". For an end user, this sucks. Lousy programming is lousy. The average person needs at least one week of professional instructions before they are capable of preparing a simple documen in M$ Word. You can achieve this level of proficiency with Lyx in less than an hour. Having said all that let me state that: * I refuse to use EMACS and only will use XEmacs on an X11 terminal. * Will never again write a troff document * Will never, ever write a LaTeX document * Am gladly using LyX to generate LaTeX documents * Will never again use PIC to draw a diagram * Avid user of xfig (the best X11 application ever! :-) * Use only X-Fmail for email and will not use Pine. * Am very comfortable with vi, and even ed for text editing. * Find FreeBSD installation, overall, very comfortble to use. Why? Because GUI interfaces are great at event/user driven applications where you really are trying to describe something abstract and arrange it in a graphical manner. The user is in the driver's seat. For a simple dialogue, where the computer needs to ask certain questions, and the user NEEDS to supply reasonable answer, GUIs have no inherent advantage. The computer is in the driver's seat. Last, but not least. Cost/benefit considerations. Being that FreeBSD is installed once in a blue moon on a system and being that there is no market/financial incentive to make that boring but critical task look pretty, why spend the effort? you will not lure in any died in the wool M4'er. M$ told them that Unix is bad, so Unix is bad. Those that can actually think for themselves will tolerate FreeBSD installation, just to get away from M$ for a while. Now, NetBSD Installation is something I was never capable of completing. I am not that smart. ---------- Sincerely Yours, Simon Shapiro Shimon@Simon-Shapiro.ORG Voice: 503.799.2313
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?XFMail.360206231329.shimon>