Mailinglist Archive: opensuse (3539 mails)

["Larry Stotler" <larrystotler@xxxxxxxxx>]

On Wed, Jun 18, 2008 at 7:19 PM, Jim Henderson <hendersj@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> I know you never suggested support for a 386.  I was saying "here's
> another relatively small market segment; maybe we should satisfy that as
> well".  It's a point of comparison.

And I understand that.  I've asked before that if fixing bugs for my
Old World Macs was too much trouble that that segment be moved to
"unofficial status", and that has not happened.

> I've seen P4 systems with CD only as well.  I nearly purchased one.  But
> if it were my only computer, I would still be likely to either upgrade
> the CD drive to a DVD, do a network-based installation (and if I didn't
> know how, I'd ask someone to help me), or borrow a drive if I was too
> poor to afford the $20 to buy a new one myself.  In fact, years ago I had
> a 486 with no CD drive in it and I wanted to install UnixWare.  I
> couldn't afford a CD drive at the time (the system was completely SCSI),
> and I did in fact borrow a SCSI CD-ROM drive from a friend so I could do
> the installation.

I remember the days of 40+ floppy installs.  However, a CD iso images
isn't as unreasonable as some are making it out to be.  A DVD is only
6 times more than a CD, while a CD is about 400 times more than a
floppy.  Almost any computer within the last 10 years would have had a
CD Drive.  A lot have had DVD drives.  Fewer have DVD burners.

> The number of people who have no friends who could lend them a drive is
> going to be very small indeed.

Very likely.  But it's an extra hassle that could and, IMHO, Should be
avoided.  The purpose of Linux on the Desktop is to make it as
painless as possible for the newcomer.  The more complicatiions that
crop up, the less likely the newcomer will finish the install and use
the system.  If we are targeting newcomers, then we should support
them.  And if a CD based install is supporting them, then that should
be an option.

> But you'd be OK downloading 5 or 6 ISOs to burn to a CD?  I'm not
> following the logic here.  Besides, you'd indicated you were talking
> about a notebook computer, surely that's portable.

I have a notebook.  Others may not.  Even the, I still have to take it
somewhere and HOPE I can tranfer the file over the network.  I get
tired of trying to copy a file with samba to a windows computer
because it craps out too much.  And a lot of people don't trust that
live cd no matter how much you tell them it won't hurt their system.
Maybe I'm trying to be the Devil's advocate too much here, but I have
encountered these same arguements before when I speak to people about
Linux.

> People who are just used to Windows aren't going to take the time to
> download an ISO first at all - since Winblows came with the computer,
> they'll just use that.

And that's actually the segment that Linux IS attracting.  The more
people complain about Vista(which IS very annoying), the more that
will be interested in an alternative.  The $$ savings alone have
swayed a couple of people and the lack of bad things is another.

> Of course not.  But developing to a minority interest tends to get things
> that overall are more important overlooked.
> The beauty of OSS is that those who are in that minority interest have
> the power to do something about it themselves.

Than that's a decision that the devs need to make, not us.  I don't
know WHY the change was made.  Perhaps Andreas could chime in and
actually explain it so all of us can understand better?

Andreas?  I'd appriciate a comment or a link to some info on this.  Thanx
-- 
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxx
For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@xxxxxxxxxxxx