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
I thought I'd say an unoffical thanks from the boys and girls at MS. Your angry tone and indignance to people not using Linux in the way only helps there cause. Has it dawned on you that Windows is popular because it has pretty little buttons that make it go? Has it dawned on you that not everyone that uses a computer is interested in its inner workings? Yes, Debian is harder to install, but only slightly. You need to have a little more understanding than selecting the "C" drive and hitting the install button. Most server admins and tech savvy users will sit down and figure out what their partition layout and fs should be. The desktop crowd doesn't care. They want an interface that is built with Flash that morphs in dinosaurs during the install. Give them what they want. Without them, the developers, both hardware and software, will never fully back Linux. RH still offers a text install as well as a GUI install. The choice is left to the end user and not forced upon them by someone's philosophical installer belief. If you don't like it, build your own text only distro. Isn't that the whole point to OSS anyways?