View Full Version : What I envision for FC5
19th March 2005, 01:46 AM
Every window manager there is with no default choice automatically listed when you choose a particular install with a sample picture and description for each.
Some say this is impossible. If Microsoft can do it then Linux should be able to do this.
And then an option to choose Dual-boot from the get-go. Click the checkbox and FC does the rest. Later when it's done it asks you to put in the other O/S CD or DVD and off you go.
Don't say this is impossible because you can do a single o/s install with Compaq SmartStart or Dell OpenManage and everyone can do this manually to date. It's 2005, surely they, that code things, are smart enough to make this a reality.
Also, this would be a HUGE plus if there was a notice that says: "Even if you uncheck this item it will be installed anyway because we've made it part of something else you clicked and you have no say if you don't want it".
And then the rest y'all can add to the list of things ya want....
19th March 2005, 02:23 AM
Why don't you do it then?
19th March 2005, 02:37 AM
Don't you think FC5 topics are a little early :p :eek: :confused:
I am not sure why you would want Every window manager, I think they made a good choice with KDE and Gnome, they are simple and clean, yeah some of the other look better and you can do so much with them, but the 'coders' have to draw line somewhere.
If you want every Window Manager, someone lese wnats every Game, someone else wants every Office app, the list goes on.
You'd need a truck load of CD's to get them all installed, it would take HOURS.
I think the current setup is pretty good, the Window managers may not be the fanciest, but they are good enough to get you into FC so that you can then get your own Window manager of choice from where ever.
As for the Dual boot comments, No I don't agree.
At least I don't think I do; if your saying that you make a selection to dual boot it then installs FC and then asks you for the second OS's CD so you can install that, then I don't agree as you would be sat there for hours.
I did try to install SuSE over FTP today, and I did like the way it scanned all the drives for other OS's and then generated a list to include in the bootloader, I liked that a lot, and it picked up everything.
The only time that i have seen that in FC is if you have Windows installed (XP) It never detects other (Non - FC) Linux installs (well not for me anyway)
Just my opinion.
19th March 2005, 04:08 AM
What I would really like to linux move to is something along the lines of an "registry" system. Not a big fat single registry like that other OS. I see somthing more like a "modularized" single point of install and configuration. It drives me batty sometimes when I install a package from source, and the libraries end up everywhere, then I install from source a few months later, and it installs the libraries in different places !!!!!!! Then I end up with two copies, in different places, and it's a real pain in the derierre (apologies to our french speaking members/visitors).
IF there was a seperate and distinct directory structure for each app, that had one "top level directory" and a single config file in that "tld" along, perhaps, with a central "repository"/"list of locations" for all installed packages, life would be SOOO much simpler.
But hey, that's just me, and that's probably just wishful thinking right now.....
(though I AM tempted to try the "Linux Registry" project from Sourceforge.)
19th March 2005, 04:56 AM
Why don't you do it then?Most likely because the technology that I know could be traced to Dell OpenManage and Compaq SmartStart. Having worked for both companies and the NDA's are still in place, etc. Let's say for instance this could be done. Why hasn't RH done it?
Maybe not every manager, but at least the top 10....
Someone said "there is a way, see the boot part during the start of the install?". Yes I do but I know what all that stuff means. What about the extreme newbie?
19th March 2005, 06:20 AM
You are correct of course.
Sure, it's technicall possible.
The question is why???
Most people DON'T want that many choices. In fact, if you look at historical computing trends, there is a trend towards "commonality" of features for ALL software packages.....
The other question is why? sure your fave window manager is thin and light.
You fail to realize/understand/appreciate that the computer industry is projecting FORWARD, not backwards.
What does that mean???? very simply put, there are some time proven fundamental assumptions about the hardware that IS available and that will BECOME available to support discreet computing functions.
And let's face it, outside of the "embedded" marketplace, 256 Meg of Ram is considered VERY low end anymore, and 512 Meg is typical, and 1 Gig+ is not uncommon.....
Or haven't you heard of Moore's Law????
19th March 2005, 06:16 PM
People who intentionally want to have a dualboot-system, are considered smart enough, to figure these things themselves. Installation is supposed to keep it easy. Of course the FC developers could more options, but that would be quite useless. Also, keep in mind that not every user understand every question printed on screen, so they could be scared off with these technical stuff. I like the way it currently is, and I absolutely see no point why it should be changed.
vBulletin® v3.8.7, Copyright ©2000-2013, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.