Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Tue, 12 Jun 2001 10:47:48 -0700
From:      David Johnson <djohnson@acuson.com>
To:        joel2a@yahoo.com
Cc:        freebsd-newbies@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject:   Re: installation doesn't work right with X and Netscape
Message-ID:  <3B2655C4.BA9BDFF6@acuson.com>
References:  <4.2.2.20010612014317.00cc33a0@pop.mail.yahoo.com> <4.2.2.20010612031723.02a65590@pop.mail.yahoo.com>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
joel2a@yahoo.com wrote:

> But the INSTALLATION PROGRAM just needs A LOT more work done to it, since
> it looks and operates like something out of the 1980's ASCII DOS  programs.

So what? I like the programs I use to be pretty. But I also want them to
be functional. Getting both would be nice, but given a choice between
the two, I would much rather have the functional.

Of all the OS installers I have ever used, and I've used quite a few of
them, only three in twenty years have never worked. One of those was
SuSE's GUI installer. It did not like the video card, and the official
word from their support department was to use the text installer
instead.

Of course the FreeBSD installer is not perfect. No installer is. But
switching operating systems just because one or two screens in the
installer don't have back-buttons is petty. Switching because Netscape
doesn't work I can understand. Switching because of the aesthetics of an
installer is nutty.

David

(ps. those other two failed installs included Corel 1.0 and OS/2 4.0,
and only on specific machines).

To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-newbies" in the body of the message




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?3B2655C4.BA9BDFF6>