Tim wrote: > Just recently I had to boot from USB to install onto a laptop with no > optical drive. I found four different methods of putting a Linux > installer onto a USB. ... > All of which was more hassle than burning a disc, and was actually > slower than burning a disc for one of the methods (I don't recall which, > but I tend to think it was the dd method). > > So, while you can install from a USB, it's not always the most > convenient. This is exactly my experience. It _is_ more convenient to install from DVD, but the reason for this is that booting from USB is not well documented. Incidentally, Ed and others have said that there are many machines which will not boot from USB. But surely there are many more that have no CD/DVD drive? And the proportion of these is surely increasing? But all this is pure speculation. One of the weaknesses of Fedora, in my view, is the apparent lack of interest in what users actually want or need. For example, what proportion of users choose KDE or Gnome, or some other Desktop Environment? Does anybody know? Suppose it turned out that far more use KDE than Gnome. Would that not suggest that KDE should be made the default? Again, how many are installing on a machine that is already partitioned? Suppose (my guess) it is something like 90%. Would it not be more rational in that case to assume as default that users would prefer to use that partitioning? I don't think I've ever seen an official or semi-official web enquiry on issues like this. -- Timothy Murphy e-mail: gayleard /at/ eircom.net School of Mathematics, Trinity College, Dublin 2, Ireland -- users mailing list users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
