On 23.02.2015 08:44, Tim wrote: > On Sun, 2015-02-22 at 15:01 -0700, Chris Murphy wrote: >> What you're talking about might be in-scope for blivet-gui. It >> definitely sounds out of scope for a GUI OS installer. >> >> Windows, OS X installers have maybe 2-3 total layouts between them. >> And their installers are completely, totally, bullet proof. They don't >> ever crash, or ask the user to create required partitions, they always >> succeed in their penultimate goal which is to install a bootable OS. >> And there are essentially zero user complaints about these installers. >> There's nothing at all to even complain about because they don't do >> anything except meet their primary requirement. Not even their >> developers or testers even complain about the installer, it does one >> thing successfully. > > While I don't find it hard to believe that Windows developers won't > complain. After all, just about all Windows users do is install Windows > as a new install, or over the top of a previous one, with no intention > of doing anything like dual-boot. Shoe-horn it in, that's all they care > about. These days, it's all single-partition, or act like it's > single-partition with a hidden boot/recovery partition that the user > doesn't know about. > > I find it harder to believe that users don't complain about the Windows > installer. I've certainly seen it fuck up, and I can't be the only one. > It was a gamble to see whether an install over the top could manage to > keep existing data, never mind settings. And trying to get it to > install to the right drive in a two-drive PC was nothing but trial and > error (one drive for Windows, a second drive for video on a non-linear > editing suite). > > I, also, am rather incredulous of how difficult it is to have the Linux > installer simply do what the user tells it to do, instead of > second-guessing them and denying them of what they want to do. If I > select custom partition, and edit partitions myself, type of options, I > expect it to have a GUI that does what I tell it to do. > > In the past, before the live DVD install era, I'd boot the install disc > and wait for to pause on some screen, then CTRL + ALT + FUNCTION-KEY to > another terminal, and fdisc my hard drive, and go back to the installer > and have it use my pre-defined partitions. Even further back, I'd > select the options to check partitions for faults, rather than get a > nasty surprise a few months in when the drive reaches a certain amount > of fullness and comes across a bad section. > > I don't know what's really so hard about giving us a simple GUI hard > drive partitioner somewhere in the install routine. Using the command > line tool is a pain (e.g. you cannot see any details about the rest of > the drive while you're working on making a partition), and there are > other standalone GUI partitioning tools that exist. > > Leave the so-called automatic smart partitioning to those people who > choose the full-automatic option. > Don't be depressed, who care about proprietary nonsense crap, in the first place. :) -- 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
