🚀 go-pugleaf

On Wed, 17 Oct 2007 08:56:34 -0500, Ignoramus27577 wrote:

> On 2007-10-17, Stephan Rose <nospam.noway@screwspammers.com> wrote:
>> On Wed, 17 Oct 2007 08:12:30 -0500, Ignoramus27577 wrote:
>>
>>> I have been a Linux user for 12 years and do not use Windows at home.
>>> So I hope that this statement will make it clear that I am not a
>>> Windows zealot.
>>> 
>>> Windows is not worth using for many reasons, but that does not mean
>>> that Linux is perfect.
>>> 
>>> That said, it my firm opinion that though Linux install process has
>>> made progress, it still SUCKS as far as
>>> 
>>> - Providing 100% clear, understandable instructions and help - Giving
>>> user control over partitioning using a simple language (other than
>>> /dev/sde1 etc)
>>> - controlling settings of grub
>>
>> Well what do you suggest it should use?
> 
> How about:
> 
> SATA Drive 1, Partition 1 (currently not formatted) IDE Drive 2,
> Partition 3 (currently has Windows)

It actually does list SATA / IDE and the drive number in front so it 
already does do this.

It doesn't show the formatted state or OS installed though. I agree, that 
wouldn't be a bad thing to show.

> 
> etc
> 
>> Should my drive listing look like this?
>>
>> "The big black box in slot number 1 in the big case under my desk?"
>> "The big black box in slot number 2 in the big case under my desk?"
>> "The big black box in slot number 3 in the big case under my desk?"
>>
>> Honestly I find
>>
>> /dev/sda
>> /dev/sdb
>> /dev/sdc
>>
>> To be perfectly fine and reasonable.
> 
> I do too, but my parents would not.
> 
>> If someone can't deal with that naming convention they have little
>> business installing an OS.
> 
> That is presumptious.

Maybe so, but I simply figure that someone should have at least some 
reasonable level of knowledge prior to installing any OS. Anything else 
is just simply too liable to end up with problems afterwards.

Just because someone can change the oil in their car doesn't mean they 
are qualified to replace the engine.

> 
>> The only way that could be removed is via a recovery disk that is
>> intended to restore an entire PC to factory defaults.
>>
>> Now that said, I agree that configuring grub could be made a bit
>> easier. Not that I ever have a need to do so, but I suppose if someone
>> does have a need to do so or wants other settings than the default, the
>> installer could give some options regarding setting up grub.
> 
> I could donate actual $1,000 USD if someone serious took on and
> undertook a complete install/GRUB config redesign. I am talking about
> real money and I am serious.

If I wasn't as busy as I am I'd almost be tempted to take you up on that. 

> 
>> Overall though, I find the Ubuntu installer to be reasonably well done.
>> I've definitely seen and used far worse and I've yet to see someone do
>> it better.
> 
> Does not mean that it no longer needs improvements.

Anything always needs improvements. =)

-- 
Stephan
2003 Yamaha R6

君のこと思い出す日なんてないのは
君のこと忘れたときがないから