🚀 go-pugleaf

"Stephan Rose" <nospam@spammer.com> wrote in message 
news:CeydncpTEMK1Y4XanZ2dnUVZ8qPinZ2d@giganews.com...
> On Thu, 18 Oct 2007 07:13:20 +0100, dennis@home wrote:
>
>> "Rick" <none@nomail.com> wrote in message
>> news:13hd1p0q7uk3u6d@news.supernews.com...
>>> On Wed, 17 Oct 2007 22:12:58 +0100, dennis@home wrote:
>>>
>>>> "Rick" <none@nomail.com> wrote in message
>>>> news:13hctdt2i2nmaa5@news.supernews.com...
>>>>
>>>> 8<
>>>>
>>>>> Linux does not tend to delete users data.
>>>>
>>>> This thread is about Linux deleting a users data.
>>>>
>>>> 8<
>>>
>>> Linux didn't delete the user's data.. by itself. The user explicitly
>>> told the installer to wipe out the data.
>>
>> Yes we all know that.
>> What is being disscussed is if the warning messages are suitable for the
>> intended target users as he didn't understand. If Linux is intended for
>> people that are computer literate then they are OK and most such users
>> will only make the odd mistake and will have backupos anyway.
>> If Linux is going to be installable by the majority of users then I
>> don't think the messages or install routine are much good.
>
> Well then, you are saying that Linux is no good for the majority of users
> because the installer is no good, right? Because they can't install it
> right?
>
> Well I suppose I can see how much more detailed the windows partition
> step is.
>
> http://hevnikov.com/img/061223-install-vista.png
>
> Really descriptive!! The majority of users are REALLY going to know
> what's going on here! I mean seriously, it couldn't be more clear.
>
> And look!!! The warning message!!
>
> http://www.zdnet.com.au/shared/images/insight/vista/11-vista.jpg
>
> Wait a moment? Microsoft is using the word DATA?!?!
>
> So if I now go by your rules which you are applying to the Linux
> installer, the windows installer (by your rules) is equally unsuitable
> for the masses. Which if I continue to go by your rules, makes installing
> Windows equally unsuitable for the masses.

Why does a discussion about Linux always end up with a Linux is better than 
windows debate?

I agree that it could be easier to install windows.

However you have to select a partition and then choose to install it using 
*advanced* options before you can format or delete it.
A user in normal mode doesn't get the options to delete or format partitions 
and installing vista to an existing partition doesn't destroy data.

Compare that to Ubuntu where you typically get three tick boxes

A: use entire disk
B: use free space
C: do it manually

Now if you choose either A or B you get the /same/ warning message just 
before it commits the changes (at least on a single disk machine).

A will delete your data and B will not.. do you not see that it is just 
wrong.