On Sunday 26 April 2009 20:11:36 Neo [GC] wrote:
> Just my two cents:
> Why a graphical installer? Shure, it looks nice, easy, modern and more
> accessable (examples: Mac OS X, Vista), but on the other hand, for me
> FreeBSD never was intended to be fancy, but to be functional.

What is wrong with fancy functional ? The two can go together I think. For you 
it may not be, but I would like it to be for me. And as to now, I don't have 
any choice : there is no fancy, easy, nice, modern and accessable installer.

> The text mode installer:
> - works on every PC, every graphics card, every screen, with serial
> console, with ssh, with screenreader
> - is easy enough for people who are able to use it after the installation
> - doesn't need a mouse to be usable

So why don't use a text mode for server and a GUI for desktop ?

> FreeBSD isn't Linux/OSX/Windows, FreeBSD is not for users who want
> eyecandy, FreeBSD is for professinals who want perfectly working
> systems, who know how to edit .conf-files, which packages the need and
> so on. (at least I think so)

Oh so all those desktopusers with Gnome/KDE/... will gladly hear this ! As a 
desktopuser I can't be a professional  who wants a perfectly working system ? 

> IMHO, the biggest problem with graphical installers is that they just
> don't work for everyone. For example, my last attempts to install Ubuntu
> Linux stopped when the installer didn't work with my graphics card or
> just choosed a mode my TFT didn't support. This was such a bad
> experience, I didn't wanted to try it anymore.

Well, my first install of windows/debian/freebsd/... didn't work out as it was 
supposed to be either. So ? Even with pc-bsd not all my hardware is recognized 
now. But if you want something that works for everyone, I don't think that 
*bsd or linux is something for you.

freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"

Reply via email to