15 Points?
|
| Author | Content |
|---|---|
| azerthoth Dec 23, 2006 9:26 AM EDT |
Using his own methods of scoring I would have rated it a bit higher that that. Apps included/available ?? any other distro have as many prepackaged apps available? took a point hit there because of a name change on just 2 packages? Ease of installation? because it doesnt have an X GUI slapped on it? C'mon the hardest part of using the net install disc is entering your passwords. The fact that it makes all the partition options available by default (although not selected by defualt) is a plus in my book. It means that more advanced users arent forced to go through a slew of additional crap just to configure the one part they wanted to change. synposis, thanks for the thought, but be more consistant with your scoring. |
| jimf Dec 23, 2006 11:08 AM EDT |
I always hate these 'try it for a day' n00b friendly reviews. They rarely if ever tell us much of anything. The truth is that virtually nothing (including and especially Windows) works 'as installed' for a user with any interests outside 'the norm'... I think that's most of us. The closest to a 'complete and polished' new user install is, without a doubt, PCLOS. This means that your mother, or Grandmother might be happy with it for day to day use, but, it may be a little simplistic for others after a while. If you're a Corporate Republican businessman, you may be happier with SuSe, and if you dig cults, you just 'gotta' have one of the 'buntus'. For the rest of us, the latest Debian testing netinstall offers a solid, dependable Linux base and the ability to build 'exactly' the desktop (or anything else) you've always wanted with a minimum of time and hassle. |
| swbrown Dec 24, 2006 3:49 AM EDT |
Desktop reviews that have the installer be part of the score are bogus. The vast majority of Desktop users get their OS pre-installed. Do people rate XP and OS/X based on the installer when doing a desktop review? You can't even install Windows XP from the CD by yourself on modern hardware, as it can't do SATA or RAID and you might not have a floppy drive to provide those extra drivers with. Btw, as an example, here are the instructions I need to install Windows XP on my system: http://forums.hexus.net/showthread.php?t=20748 |
| jimf Dec 24, 2006 5:35 AM EDT |
> Do people rate XP and OS/X based on the installer when doing a desktop review? Now isn't that a thought ;-) |
| dinotrac Dec 24, 2006 5:38 AM EDT |
>Desktop reviews that have the installer be part of the score are bogus. Still having trouble with that thinking cap, I see. I agree that the installer is not part of the desktop per se, but, in a comparison of Linux distros, it is a legitimate factor because most of us do not buy machines with Linux pre-installed. I would have expected a real linux user to know that. |
| swbrown Dec 24, 2006 6:12 AM EDT |
> I agree that the installer is not part of the desktop per se, but, in a comparison of Linux distros, it is a legitimate factor because most of us do not buy machines with Linux pre-installed. It's a bogus factor. The Desktop users people want to attract, the point of doing "Does this replace XP or OS/X yet?" reviews, aren't going to be installing their own OS once it's a usable Desktop substitute. |
| jimf Dec 24, 2006 6:24 AM EDT |
> It's a bogus factor. Let's be fair here. It's a bogus factor that reviews for XP and OS/X 'do not' include an evaluation of their installers. If only as an apples & apples (no pun intended) comparison. Even if most come preinstalled, many still will be doing an install (or reinstall) later down the line. |
| swbrown Dec 24, 2006 9:28 PM EDT |
> Even if most come preinstalled, many still will be doing an install (or reinstall) later down the line. They just call support to do that. Most Windows XP desktop users don't even get a reinstall CD with their Windows XP systems, yet Windows XP is still claimed to be a better desktop OS than GNU/Linux. That shows the installer is not a real software factor in being considered the better desktop. The incessant focus on the installer in desktop GNU/Linux reviews is unhealthy, as it places a priority on things that won't actually make a difference to desktop acceptance. 40% of the screenshots in that article are of the installer! It's literally comical to imagine someone trying to convince an OS/X user that GNU/Linux is a better desktop because the installer is superior, yet almost all GNU/Linux desktop reviews spend the most time on that aspect. |
| dinotrac Dec 25, 2006 4:26 AM EDT |
>The incessant focus on the installer in desktop GNU/Linux reviews is unhealthy, as it places a priority on things that won't actually make a difference to desktop acceptance. Carryover from the bad old days, I suspect. Installers still matter, unfortunately, because installed linux is hard to come by. However, most linux installers these days are pretty good and installation tends to be painless for most people, with some having to pull a little hair depending on their hardware. It is fair to say, however, that a review should discuss the installation only to note difficulties or uniquely wonderful features. |
Posting in this forum is limited to members of the group: [ForumMods, SITEADMINS, MEMBERS.]
Becoming a member of LXer is easy and free. Join Us!