On Mon, Dec 07, 2020 at 02:18:43PM -0500, Máirín Duffy wrote: > I get that, but "dual-boot" is a solution, not a problem. (Well, > it's a problem when you accidentally wipe out your ability to boot > Windows or worse lol, but generally it's not the problem-to-solve > here.) Ha! That's true. However, it's also the solution people are coming in with. So there's a built-in extra "expense" in telling them "well, actually, do a different thing". It doesn't mean we can't, it's just an additional hurdle. > 1. I only own one computer and I want to run more than one OS. Is > this really a problem? Does someone who owns one computer not have > access to flash drives, external HDDs, or (completely free and > functional) VM software? Especially considering the latter, > absolutely not, they do have access to VM software. So let's go > another step, why would a VM not solve the problem? Flash drives aren't a great experience because they're slow (and cheap ones not really robust for constant live use even if we make that work better). External hard drives are a pain with a laptop. Plus installing on a second device still requires _some_ dual-boot understanding. So, VMs. There the problem is that AIUI, only Windows Pro has built-in virtualization tools. As far as I know, VirtualBox is the only free and open source option. (Maybe even the only free-as-in-cost option too. I don't think VMWare is in this market anymore.) But, here's the hard part: if I had to pick which is harder for a non-techny person to pick up, _other than_ "a mistake can destroy all of your data", I would say VirtualBox is actually harder. But that's a pretty big "other than", of course. > 2. I only own one computer, I want to run more than one OS, and both > OSes *must* be baremetal. OK. I need help with the latter half. I > could see, some kind of hand-wavy "I'm a gamer and my graphics > hardware / gamery stuff only works best baremetal" but I could not > see that for the Linux side, only the Windows side, meaning, put a > Linux VM on your Windows OS, there's no problem. So is there a > problem that demands a solution that must OSes be baremetal because > if it exists I don't know what it is nor how common it is? Well, on the gamer side, someone might be testing to see if Linux is adequade to ditch Windows for gaming entirely. Another GPU-related usecase might be Cuda/GPGPU programming. I've got a not-quite-fleshed out thought here too which I'll try to articulate... a VM is perfectly fine for kicking the tires, and good for two other big use cases: running some specific application that isn't available natively (I used to run Quicken in a VM, for example), or to provide a development environment. It's not typical to make your daily environment (Qubes users aside!) be the "inside" machine. So it's my unsubstantiated feeling that someone who has Fedora Workstation in a VM is less likely to become a more heavy user than someone who has it on metal. That's possibly something we could research, actually. Maybe I'm all wrong — or maybe the increased ease / decreased risk would make it accessible to so many more users that it's still a net win (assuming we could overcome VirtualBox-difficulty issues). > 3. I own a few computers, but I am a tech journalist and I need to > install multiple distros in a multiboot situation so I can review > them. I also kind of don't understand how VM doesn't solve this > case. It's a case that was brought up the last time we had a grand > multi-boot discussion (in the context of installer UX.) Journalists like to talk about performance, and for that, they want bare metal. Honestly though, I'm not super concerned about this case. Those journalists can either figure it out, or dedicate a machine, or just do several full reinstalls. > I suspect the right / best solution is to evaluate where our > livemedia story is, upgrade the bits that need upgrading to make it > robust (as I think Neal mentioned elsewhere in the thread), and make > the try story as easy as, "stick a usb flash drive of (>= whatever > size) into your computer and run this app", and the baremetal > install story have an actual narrative / plan of sorts that can be > filled in with details as the user prefers. But just a sketch of an > outline. If we want to go the USB flash drive route, in addition to software improvements, we'll need to make it clear that the minimum for a good experience is a higher-quality USB 3 drive (in a USB 3 port). [...] > The best experience is always installing on a fresh, unencumbered > disk, isn't it? It's also the easiest for the end user in terms of > minimizing stress, mental load, risk. So if we could lay out a plan > for them based on their tolerance for the top 3 options above - Yes, absolutely. [...] > I would like to know where the idea for dual boot came from. It's a > common thing right for someone to come in asking for help doing a > $solution and you have to get everyone to step back to define the > $problem first, then direct towards the right $solution. If that > makes sense. Yeah, wherever it came from, it's an endemic meme at this point. :-/ > Also sorry for the WALLSOFTEXT on all of this, it's just something > I've thought a lot about in the past from all of the installer UX > work I've been involved with and I gathered a lot of info / data on > it already. No apology needed! I appreciate the thoughts. -- Matthew Miller <mattdm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> Fedora Project Leader _______________________________________________ desktop mailing list -- desktop@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to desktop-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/desktop@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
