From: "Antti Kurenniemi" 

Joe,


> Just last week I had done the Xandros install, which hides
> almost everything.  I noted some things I wish had been
> explicitly stated, like the amount of free space available,
> but in general I think it walked a consistant path.  Too much
> information is the usual rookie complaint.

I think it's a no-win situation, simply because the amount of information
that people want to see during an installation varies too much. In any
case, I think the Mandrake installation went a bit too far on the
"supposedly" user friendly side, when it in fact became slightly
un-user friendly. But, that is all just IMO.


> I'm afraid that one part of Linux that is never going to change is
> choice.

I've no problem with having choices, but there has to be some sense to it.
I hate going out to get a cup of coffee, and having to answer twenty or
more questions (this blend or that, ethiopian or lithuanian, paperbag or
plastic, yadda-yadda-yadda) before I get the damn coffee. Choices, yes, but
not to a ridiculous extent.


> But maybe the first time you pick a tool, use it for awhile,
> and then find another one for the same task that is
> much more to your liking, you'll change.

True, but if I'm sending a fax, what can three different fax sending tools
offer me? It is just a fax. Again, choice is good, too much choice is a
drag.


> The point being that you have decided instead of having
> some idiot in Redmond deciding for you.

I can use a different text editor in Windows, no-one in Redmond forces me
to use their notepad. Difference being, with Windows I get less choices *by
default*, and have to actively *want* to have another tool. What if I'm
perfectly happy with the one installed on my system? Then the rest (which,
I might add if I was into sarcasm, were decided upon by some idiot in some
other place ;-) are just a waste of my time/hd space, and mess up the whole
thing.


> You know those idiots, I presume.

Nope, I have nothing to do with MS, I've just used Windows since version 1.
I also am not in love with it, but so far it does it's job for me, and I'm
fairly satisfied with it.


> They are same buttstupid insipid assholes

 I learn new words from you almost every day (I'm not a native English
speaker) ;-)


> who designed email and browser clients that are nothing more
> than greenhouse incubators for viruses and worms.

Okay, I may be sticking my head in the wrong place here, but just for the
record, I have had *zero* viruses in my systems *ever*, and I have *always*
used MS Outlook, Outlook Exchange, Internet Explorer and so on, so I do not
completely agree with your statement.


> They made those choices for you.

They made the choice of what is installed by default, not what I can use if
I want to use something different.


> And since most states won't allow you to smash their
> frigging heads in without a license to kill vermin, you're
> pretty much stuck.

No I'm not, Joe. I can download about a gazillion apps for Windows, buy
them from the local store, or steal them from my friends. I don't consider
myself stuck with Windows any more than with Linux.


> I'm really surprised that Mandrake doesn't have automatic
> hardware detection like Red Hat's kudzu.

So was I. Maybe it is there, but I just didn't know how to turn it on or
something like that. Please post here if you happen to find out anything,
if you try it with your system.


> Those names are from KDE, I think.  That's why the theming
> with K in front, like Gnome apps sometimes come as Gwhatever:
> GPhoto, GAIM, Getc.

Yeppers, I gathered that much. Still, I do insist on my point that the
naming conventions could be a lot clearer.


> I agree that in your case it probably is moot.  Ditto with those
> who have similar reactions.  But all around the world people
> are moving to Linux in great numbers, and for them the installation
> is a critical part of that migration.  Then too there is all the FUD
> around Windows being easier to install.  That's a lie that I am
> enjoying smashing to smithereens in this series on installations.

By the way, I only said that the speed of the installation is a moot point,
not the ease of it, but there I also consider Windows to be very easy to
install. Mandrake 9 was easy to install, yes, but it didn't result in as
well set up system as Windows 2000 in my experience.

(if you want to know more: I live in Finland, and after selecting my
regional options in the installing phase, the keyboard layout was still
wrong, the time zone was still wrong, and I had to go hunt for these
settings around the place. I've installed Windows 2000 numerous times, and
after selecting the right values during the installation phase, you'll
never need to bother with them again. Though, a plus for Mandrake to at
least having Finland on the lists...)



Antti Kurenniemi
(not looking to pick a fight, just not agreeing with everything)

--- BBBS/NT v4.01 Flag-4