> See for example Martin Krafft's blog: > http://blog.madduck.net/debian/2007.05.08_a-lesson-learnt.xhtml > > I'd vote against making this default anyway; if I wanted Windows like > obscurity of what my system does, I'd stayed with Windows and not > switched to Linux. I knew that (in French "je le savais"). I knew that writing this, I would trigger that. It is perfectly obvious for me that such things should be activated only for systems that support them. It is also perfectly obvious that nice boot environments tend to hide information (this is indeed why they're nice). However, who *really* uses that information in normal situations? It is my understading that all such utilities offer a way to disable the cute graphics/colors/whatever when needed (for instance when the kernel crashes just like 2.6.20 crashes on my system as it seems). So, why not offer them as easily as possible to our users? Which means, yes, activate them by default. That is certainly more marketing stuff than deeply useful stuff but marketing and appealing presentation also counts. So, what is your position about installing usplash with the desktop task?
Description: Digital signature