Linked by Thom Holwerda on Fri 10th Feb 2006 22:21 UTC, submitted by egan
Permalink for comment 94905
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
News
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/22/13 22:23 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/22/13 13:38 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/22/13 13:30 UTC, submitted by JRepin
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/21/13 22:06 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/21/13 21:45 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/21/13 15:53 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/20/13 22:43 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/20/13 21:50 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/19/13 23:15 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/19/13 23:11 UTC, submitted by Drumhellar
More News »
Sponsored Links



Member since:
2006-02-11
Okay I preface my comment with this : I don't use Windows at home. I have not used it since late 90s except for when I've had to.
That said I can now talk about the installer. Please correct me if I am wrong. Isn't the windows installer text based ? Well for the first few stages. You get asked the question of whether you want to (R)epair , Install etc from a text based interface and then it begins the install or repair. It does all the hardware detection at the beginning just as the Ubuntu Installer does.
So I don't see how the installer is THAT BAD. I can see it's weakness in comparison to the windows Installer.
for example, you have too many dialogs at the beginning ,where as windows doesn't ask you about your keyboard, or language etc. Some might argue that is a strength , i don't know.
My point is that, therre is that great a difference (now) with the windows installer and the text based type installers.
please correct... i know I have made some errors as I am NOT a user of Windows :-)