Date: Sun, 31 Aug 1997 20:03:32 -0500 (EST) From: John Fieber <jfieber@indiana.edu> To: Mike Smith <mike@smith.net.au> Cc: "Jordan K. Hubbard" <jkh@time.cdrom.com>, Peter Korsten <peter@grendel.IAEhv.nl>, freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Subject: Re: sysinstall (was Re: Conclusion to "NT vs. Unix" debate) Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.3.96.970831193929.307L-100000@fallout.campusview.indiana.edu> In-Reply-To: <199709010003.JAA04315@word.smith.net.au>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Mon, 1 Sep 1997, Mike Smith wrote: > As an issue of curiosity, and for general review does the sequence : > > - step sequentially (in some hopefully logocal order) through all the > required configuration dialogs > - present the gathered information in summary form, with functionality > to jump immediately to a particular editing screen if a parameter is > found to be wrong (by the user) > - offer a proceed/cancel selection > > come closer to the ideal for the gather/review/confirm cycle? I've seen this approach a lot, and the review is helpful but not sufficient. Imagine an installation with 6 screens. You make a mistake (or a poorly informed decision) on the second screen which you realize on the third screen. With the above scenario, at the best, you must keep that error in mind as you proceed through the rest of the process to the review screen. With fairly long installation process, it is easy to forget about some mistake made near the beginning, for example, realizing that you actually wanted a separate partition for /usr/local. This is aggrivated by the density of relatively complex decisions that must be made during the install process. In short, the fewer intervening events between realizing an error and correcting the error, the fewer steps involved and the more likely that the error will actually be corrected. At the worst, the mistake may result in taking a wrong fork in the installation process which cannot be carried through to the confirmation stage, thus requiring the user to abort the whole process and start over. Also, how does the user know that there will be a complete review/confirmation stage near the end of the gathering phase? The ability to review and correct at any point in the process will reduce anxiety about making mistakes. -john
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.BSF.3.96.970831193929.307L-100000>