Operating Systems > Linux and UNIX

linux getting a bigger slice of the pie?

<< < (2/2)

Calum:
preinstallation is not so good for linux as it is for windows. where windows has very limited options during install, linux can be very differently installed depending on preference. Personally, i think that if it were preinstalled, it should be preinstalled with EVERYTHING and on first boot it should go through the whole normal install process, and delete all the packages the user doesn't want and so on. Of course the real install media would also be provided for future changeage.

I don't think preinstalled linux would help 'the cause' very much for this reason. preinstalled on laptops would be good for one reason though, it would mean that more linux compatible laptops would be assembled, and it would take the guesswork out of whether it's linux compatible hardware or not. even if you buy it with lycoris on it and then wipe it to put SuSE, Slackware and red hat on it, it's more likely than if you try and install a linux OS on a brand echh windows machine...

doublefresh:
Your average user of a $200 system will only be using e-mail, the net and some office type products. No need to install everything.

Just my 2 cents

Calum:
while i agree with you, needs change. You never know which average user just happens to want to write and compile their own C stuff, or something else that is not 'normal'. Also, some other user might pop up onto the scene six months after the machine is bought, or maybe the person buys the machine as a 'normal' user, learns a lot of stuff, and needs more software.

Most of the time, so long as they have the install CDs no problem, but it annoys me because linux systems could be just as bloated as windows, if they were 'little bit of everything' style preinstalled. this is the only down side of mandrake, in my opinion. Now i know why people say it's a good beginner OS, because mandrake is a bit bloated by default.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[*] Previous page