Petr Tomeš wrote:
2006/5/14, Frank Schoep <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
On Saturday 13 May 2006 23:31, Keith Curtis wrote:
> When a computer is bootstrapping itself, it has its greatest chance
for
> failure. Pretty art is nice, but status text is important.
On Saturday 13 May 2006 23:30, Paul Sladen wrote:
> Removing the text is a project for edgy. For dapper we need the
text for
> debugging and the LiveCD infrastructure relies on the text-getting
read.
On Saturday 13 May 2006 23:41, Viper550 wrote:
> Design Wise, a blank screen with just an Ubuntu Logo and a Progress
Bar
> seems pretty good. But still, why can't we have a black background?
First of all, I'm not suggesting getting rid of all text, just hiding
the
things that don't cause trouble. With "no text" I meant no messages like
"Starting up..." or "Booting the system...", since I believe they're
rather
unnecessary. Text that *is* going to be shown are the FAIL messages plus
description.
I fully agree with you. Windows 3.x didn't annoy users with this "OK"
messages ten years ago, nor Windows 95, 98, ME, 2000, XP, Vista... Not
only Windows, but Mac OS (X) too. All these systems are keeping users
informed in detail only about fails/arrors, but not about dozens
things, which works without problem.
Just some notes about the splash screens;
Windows 2000 was the only Windows version with a working progress bar on
the splash screen
Mac OS X versions up to 10.3 did give information about boot progress,
delivered by a single line of text and a progress bar. But then on
Tiger, Apple decided to censor the boot progress, giving us just the
words "Starting Mac OS X" and a progress bar that just filled up at a
specific rate, not showing the progress at all!
Viper550
--
ubuntu-art mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-art
