Re: Corel/Debian Linux Installer
>>"Michael" == Michael Stone <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
Michael> For someone who knows how all of that works, it's no big
Michael> deal. But that knowledgable person will look for and find
Michael> the partitioning option under the advanced menu. Regardless
Michael> of the default, the advanced user can get what he wants. But
Michael> the beginner is better served by easily getting his system
Michael> to the point where he can run basic apps and feel like he's
Michael> accomplished something. (Getting stuck at the partitioning
Michael> menu does *not* inspire confidence.) I've watched people
Michael> installing linux, I've watched them get confused. This can
Michael> really be a problem for a first-time or casual user.
A better system would be to ask the questions anyway, and
provide the defaults. Novice users would be encouraged to stick with
the defaults, but would learn that something called partitioning
exists. Also, the questions can be prefaced with a short explanation
of what each partition does, why it is recommended it be a separate
aprtition, and a short rationale for size. (This assumes we have
tested an auto mated disk partitioning mechanism).
Education of novice users should be a part of our efforts.
Non-novice users should have the option of dropping into fdisk.
Michael> from experience: I've been running a single-partition system
Michael> at home for a while now. (Well, mostly: I've got a seperate
Michael> /boot and some extra space that didn't fit into my raid
Michael> group.) There's so much free space on most end-user hard
Michael> disks today that fragmentation is very unlikely.
Not all of us are so lucky. I think that removing options
because the novice user is too much of a novice to use them is being
patronizing. People can learn, and a gentle introduction to
partitioning via the recommended partitions and questions is better
than an all or nothing scheme.
Michael> What I'd like to see is a default installation routine which
Michael> a windos user can run to get a simple, working system
Michael> without much trouble. Not a system that's optimum for every
Michael> need, but one that can drop in as a windows replacement. I
Michael> want the install process to be a positive experience which
Michael> leaves the user eager for more. I don't want to see an
Michael> install process that confuses and frustrates the user with
Michael> questions and options that don't mean anything to him. As an
Michael> experienced user, I'm never going to use that default
Michael> installation--I'll go for the custom install that puts
Michael> things where I want them. But why burden the new user with
Michael> the options I want to micromanage my system?
I thikn it boils down to a philosophical difference. I am
leery of system sthat assume that the users are too busy/dumb/naive
to appreciate choices, and proceeds to make choices for them. The
user learns nothing in the process.
The answer should not be to remoce choices, but to present the
choices in a manner that is positive -- and provide reasonable
defaults that the user can just trust.
Frankly, I still cringe at the thought of fscking a 22GB
partition. Or trying to make a tape backup of one.
"Justice has nothing to do with what goes on in a courtroom, Justice
is what comes out of a courtroom." Clarence Darrow
Manoj Srivastava <email@example.com> <http://www.debian.org/%7Esrivasta/>
Key C7261095 fingerprint = CB D9 F4 12 68 07 E4 05 CC 2D 27 12 1D F5 E8 6E