Michael Pogue wrote: > Then perhaps it comes down to a tradeoff: > > Is it better to have the user potentially miss the License checkbox, and > get an extra popup (Let me ask you again... :-), or is it better to have > an extra panel that separates out the license/I accept question (e.g. as > SuSE does)? > > If we really have to ask about the license (I'd still like to understand > how Ubuntu gets away without asking), then I bet that a user test could > resolve this question.... >
I see two quite distinct "markets" for the license. The Corporate/Enterprise client is going to want to know the details of the license well before install and is likely going to refer it to legal council. The personal market (and I suspect that all or most of the non-Sun users in this group fit this market) will rarely bother to read the agreement and would rather not even see it. They/We are happy to just tick the box, and if we have to scroll to the bottom, will just use the "end" key. The big question, is what is Sun trying to achieve with the presentation of the license? And will the presentation method be valid over many jurisdictions? For example, New Zealand law indicates that if users are known to not normally read software licenses, then vendors cannot use the content of such licenses to enforce a contract, unless there is hardcopy, analogue signed proof of understanding and acceptance. BTW, I appreciate the Ubuntu install, it is quick and easy, so meets my idea of a good product. I have installed it many times and just appreciate the ease of install. Both Sun and Suse require some form of tick, but I have never read either license. Same for Microsoft "read before opening" licenses. I have formally advised Microsoft that I don't read their license terms, they replied "you are no different to anyone else" and still let me use their software. From a user perspective, the Ubuntu approach works just fine.
