On 15-Jan-08, at 7:55 PM, Shawn Walker wrote: > On Jan 15, 2008 7:18 PM, John Sonnenschein > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >> On 15-Jan-08, at 5:08 PM, Glynn Foster wrote: >> >>>> >>>> Again, where is the loss of compatibility? Or the intent to drop >>>> that? Believe me, we're well aware that compatibility has been one >>>> of >>>> the more valuable attributes of Solaris. >>> >>> And will certainly be the valuable attributes of OpenSolaris. >>> However, absolute >>> compatibility out of the box *may* not be an absolute requirement - >>> in those >>> cases we could make it easy to change your path, or install packages >>> that aren't >>> by default to maintain that. >> >> options that aren't included and easy to toggle by default don't get >> used, and are silly regardless. How many Ubuntu users do you know >> that >> use KDE ? > > ...and look how successful it is. Most users just want something that > works, and that is well designed. > > They don't want a bunch of "bells, knobs, and switches." > > To be honest, I'm at the point in my development career where I just > want to install the OS, login and be able to start developing.
your comment serves only to enhance my point. Users don't want GNU, they want something that works. > > For me, Indiana is a step in that direction. > > I don't want to have to click through a bunch of prompts. > > I want a simple, elegant installer. > > Other people may curse me, but I love the fact that XP, Vista, and OS > X pretty much just have a big "install w/ no options" button. And they even include an "Advanced" button, which you can safely ignore, or click if you're not interested in their defaults. Did you know you can install OSX on UFS? true story. it's in the "Advanced" tab. Users that care can use it. Those that don't don't even need to know it exists _______________________________________________ indiana-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/indiana-discuss
