Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Sun, 18 Feb 2007 11:29:21 -0800 (PST)
From:      Nicole <nicole@unixgirl.com>
To:        freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: sysinstall vs BSD Installer
Message-ID:  <425347.15096.qm@web51804.mail.yahoo.com>

next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
--- Jona Joachim <walkingshadow@grummel.net> wrote:
> Hi!
> There has been a lot of discussion recently about whether
sysinstall 
> should be replaced or not.
> The purpose of sysinstall is to initially install FreeBSD and it
> serves 
> this purpose quite well. However sysinstall is also the first thing
a
> 
> new user gets to see of FreeBSD. People which are used to shiny
Linux
> 
> Live CDs with Framebuffer boot sequences and all the jewelry are
 shoked 
> when they are confronted with the ncurses interface and walk away
> most 
> of the time. This is a pity because you really use the installer
once
> 
 every couple of years and it says nothing about the OS.
> Would it be worth considering to provide the BSD Installer [1] as
an 
> alternate choice to sysinstall for a default FreeBSD installation?
> I'm sure several people already thought of it and it might be 
> interesting to hear their conclusions.
> 
> Regards,
> Jona
 
  To me the whole issue boils down to flash vs substance.
  (stands on soapbox)
 
  If someone is building a server, they want something easy, simple,
 fast, and will work on any of the myriad of weak built-in video cards
 available...  or even via a serial port. The current installer is
 fine.
 
  Some, however, while building a workstation for X-windows etc. might
 expect something pretty, to belay the experience to come while
 running the the full X experience. They may want some flashiness and
the appearence of something gee wiz and cool. "Is this what I am giving
 up windows for?"
 
  But, you cannot please everyone. However, I believe that if people
 get  past the "where's my gee wiz flashy installer" they will enjoy
the
 ncurses elegant simplicity. FreeBSD, to me, has always stood for
 stability, not flashiness. 
 
  Of course elegant simplicity is not what the internet is about these
 days is it? We now even have advertisements that flash and spin and
 now even play video at us! So why can't they make an installer do the
 same thing? 
  
  Just like with the barrage of annoying adverts these days, just
 because something can be done, doesn't mean its the right thing to
 do. 
 
 
   Nicole

--
Music:  http://www.myspace.com/theparts 
Music2: http://www.drumslayer.com
Words:  http://www.unixgirl.com
Images: http://www.deviantimages.com
Image Hosting:  http://www.picturetrail.com



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?425347.15096.qm>