jdd wrote: > Rajko M a écrit : > >> The simple doesn't mean only lesser screen content. > > most of the time, complicated mean "I don't understand".
It always mean that for a new user. Surely some stuff can be made easier, but time and again simple screen is not real help. The way to get help article that will explain what to do, where to find more information, will cut much better than "simple" screen. If one doesn't want to read, than he will either mess up the installation and look for help after, or straight look for assistance. That is how it works. Assuming that something can be made simple by removing screen content is plain wrong, but that is what I repeated few times, with more details, in previous answer to Azerion. > an icon with "http" may mean nothing for newbie, may be "web server" is > better, but it's not that sure :-) You can safely assume that if http, that one can see every moment during browsing, doesn't mean nothing to user, than "web server" means even lesser. Whoever wants to play with "do it yourself" web server, must learn some basic information about how the web works, and there is no way to skip it. If one doesn't want to learn there is a plenty of companies that will do everything, from web design to technical setup and web hosting. The only thing that user has to know is where to find money for the bills. > May be yast could have a two level "swhowroom", one for only newcommers, > the other for more experienced user (and the better of them will > probably never use yast :-) - but this is not for install. That is what Azerion proposes as default (no information) and expert (all available settings). YaST is already configured that way and there is no much playroom for further simplification, before we start to develop quasi simple installation. I have no good word for many windows with few words (looks simple) that replace one configuration screen. What I don't know on one screen I will not know split in 10 screens, so I will need online help to read about, or someone to explain me (walk me trough, perform installation for me). > what is true is than most of the setups should be backported to a second > session, after the first install. It's too annoying to make all an > install again because the modem was not found correctly and crashes the > install. I agree. YaST is trying to install all and that often has as result failed installation, but this is related to hardware database entries that list hardware as a safe, and it is not. What is the reason? Could be bad entry in HCL that hardware works, but it works only under certain conditions. Problems can be: 1) manufacturer didn't listed limitations, or is using good sold device name for a different hardware base. 2) driver works for a specific hardware or firmware version, or works with some unlisted tweak. The problems with hardware database can't be avoided with Linux device driver distribution model, but they are addressed with recent Novell initiative that promotes vendor active role in distribution of device drivers in the same way as it is done in MS based solutions. Until that model will get proper vendor support, impact of installation lockups can be minimized with installation model that writes status on hard disk, or other media, and can detect that there was previous installation attempt, and have log that can tell where installation was interrupted. Than, for instance, if interrupt was on some device driver test, than a message about it shows up on the screen, asking user to clarify what was the reason for broken process: - power outage - manual power off for following reason: -- keyboard or/and mouse doesn't work for a long period (must be stated how many seconds is long for older and slower computers) -- blank or garbled screen - computer restarted by itself and than installation process will send info message to the user: - it will leave device installation for later - it will attempt to install device again. Present status is that YaST installation is designed very safe for dual boot systems, so it doesn't write to hard disk before it is ready for Linux. That makes impossible to have an installation log. > A good install session would give a running system with a basic > graphical screen (800x600?) and no network (if not used for install) It should attempt to give all, but if it doesn't work there must be safe fallback option. IMHO, anything is better than total failure. This reminds me that when I try to help somebody there is no troubleshooting system that is easy to start and get informations if on the other side is new Linux user, but that is another topic. I think it will be the best place to discuss it on this mail list, as improvement idea. -- Regards, Rajko. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
