Dylan wrote:
On Wednesday 10 January 2007 20:21, Tony Alfrey wrote:
b. the hassle factor to be at the level of that for a Mac. A list
of absolutely compatible systems would help *on the hardware side*.
But new hardware comes out every day, and there are effectively infinite
permutations which cannot be effectively tested - how would you compile,
verify and update that list without it being out of date before you started
unless A) you control the hardware design process (Apple) or B) you can
dictate how the hardware and software interact (Microsoft)?
Dylan
I propose a simple list. I post to the list and say essentially
"these are the exact components in my box and I installed Distro X and
it required *no tweaking*". The equivalent of Wikipedia, with a very
narrow, well-delineated scope, and perhaps some template for the way the
*system* is defined. New hardware *does* come out everyday and people
test it everyday. People can edit said list, and add comments:
"Installed OK, but discovered a week later that USB port was not
functional". It is a *system* list, not a *hardware* list. Us geeks
often buy individual pieces of *hardware*, install rpm this or tarball
that; the average user buys a *system*, which includes the distro, and
expects it to work. We document that info. We narrow the definition of
a *system* as one which, after component assembly, installs a distro
*with no additional fussing*. Like a Mac.
Often, I see on the SuSE list is "I bought this system and installed
SuSE 10.x and it *doesn't* work." But we *know* that there are many out
there with the opposite experience. Why archive what doesn't work,
let's archive what *does* work. Implore those who were successful to
"give it up" as we say.
--
Tony Alfrey
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
"I'd Rather Be Sailing"
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
