Linked by Paul Hankes Drielsma on Tue 15th Apr 2003 06:40 UTC
I can't take anymore comments like "Debian/Gentoo/OpenBSD/etc. are not good/user-friendly because they lack a graphical installer." Searching the web, I couldn't find a comprehensive site describing the good and the bad about graphical installers for various OSes throughout the years, so in this article I hope to debunk a few of the myths on the basis of my own personal and professional experience.
Permalink for comment
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Recent Original Stories
Recent Comments
Headlines
Random Comments
Random Stories
Random OS Link
This analogy is getting a little out of hand, not? I'm getting thirsty
), which have a totally different goal, target a totally different group of users, and thus (no surprise) are totally different.
Back on topic (sort of). I wouldn't want to do a windows vs. *nix comparison today, because the *nix-world has far to many faces to be treated as just one OS.
There are linux distro's that are very similar to MS Windows, or at least strive to be. There's also Mac OS X, which is very userfriendly and graphical, yet it a UNIX-like OS.
Then there's commercial Unices, like Solaris, HP-UX and IRIX, that aren't used much as a general desktop, but are often used for very specific tasks, like simulations and such. And towards the user, they are rather userfriendly too.
On the other side of the spectrum we find operating systems like OpenBSD (my personal favorite
There's a lot of choice in the *nix-world, and I'd like to keep it that way.