On Friday 26 June 2009 20:50:58 Jon Stanley wrote: > ... >18:42:08 <Kevin_Kofler> Sweeping them under the carpet is bad. >18:42:16 <Kevin_Kofler> I also hate how x86_64 is being hidden. >18:42:21 <nirik> presenting them all on the top page is also fail. >18:42:22 <jds2001> and I defer to her on design decisions, since I >couldn't design my way out of a paper bag :) >18:42:29 <j-rod> hey, I was just going to mention x86_64 >18:42:43 <nirik> perhaps we could come up with a better way somehow. >I'm sure they are open to creative ideas. >18:43:08 <Kevin_Kofler> jds2001: The problem is, if you read her >credentials (GNOME Women membership etc.), she's very biased. >18:43:13 <nirik> also, x86_64/i686 dual arch disks would be lovely. >18:43:33 <j-rod> so it should be "Get Fedora 11 GNOME Desktop Edition >for Intel Pentium, Pentium II, Pentium III, early Pentium IV, Core >Duo, AMD Athlon XP, Athlon MP, Via C3... Now!" >18:43:33 * thomasj will make a main page and send it to the website >people, so they can decide if it's better or not. >18:43:56 <thomasj> eeww >18:44:07 <j-rod> (yes, I left some off, it got tiring typing that many >ancient crappy processors) >18:44:36 <Kevin_Kofler> I think i686 should be deprecated and clearly >advertised as only for old computers or netbooks, not catered for with >dual-arch disks. >18:44:48 <j-rod> ha. powerpc is more obviously displayed than x86_64 is > ... Is there any info message telling user something like: "You are installing 32bit system on 64bit hardware. Consider using 64bit system for better performance"? Michal -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
