Return to BSD News archive
Path: euryale.cc.adfa.oz.au!newshost.carno.net.au!harbinger.cc.monash.edu.au!munnari.OZ.AU!news.ecn.uoknor.edu!solace!eru.mt.luth.se!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!feed1.news.erols.com!howland.erols.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!ncar!newshost.lanl.gov!crs
From: crs@lanl.gov (Charlie Sorsby)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc
Subject: Re: *** Is FreeBSD easy to install ??? ***
Date: 10 Oct 1996 15:55:48 GMT
Organization: Los Alamos National Laboratory
Lines: 69
Message-ID: <53j6a4$gua@newshost.lanl.gov>
References: <3248ab21.5993197@news.inetnow.net> <53ens0$lrs@uriah.heep.sax.de> <53g9fe$e8j@prometheus.acsu.buffalo.edu> <vtvicjtscx.fsf@tyd1.tydfam.iijnet.or.jp>
NNTP-Posting-Host: hamlet.lanl.gov
The first part of this is a question asked here where it can be
addressed by people who are not hypnotized by Bill Gates' empire.
After the initial questions, there is some FBSD stuff, I promise. :)
In article <vtvicjtscx.fsf@tyd1.tydfam.iijnet.or.jp>,
Takeshi Yamada <ken@tyd1.tydfam.iijnet.or.jp> wrote:
=
= Windows95 maybe one of the best OS from installation viewpoint - not OS
My system came with W95 installed and, so, I have the OEM
distribution (is that what it's called?) -- the CDROM says "For
Distribution only with a New PC." The only documentation that I
received about W95 is a booklet titled _Introducing Microsoft
Windows 95 For distribution only with a new PC_. The only
information on installation that I've found in it are pp xiv, xv
both of which assume that some other microsoft OS is already
running on the system.
Is there any source of information on installing W95? Suppose, for
example, that someday I should need to replace a disk and have to
reinstall both W95 and FBSD to a virgin disk. It would be nice
have information about what to expect--assuming, of course, that
the diskette and CDROM that I received are all I need to install
W95.
= And FreeBSD follows it exceeding OS/2.
= We'd better mind how much MS spent for that one time fancy graphics/
= images at installation which does nothing to do with the OS performance.
= MS spends a lot for customers' first glance like comodity producers.
If I'm not misunderstanding what Ken is saying here, I fully agree.
If I interpret that paragraph correctly, he's saying that glitzy
"magic" installation programs are not the way to go. I couldn't
agree more. I, for one, would far rather see the effort redirected
from development of fancy installation programs the, when things go
right, do everything for you to *paper* documentation that explains
what is being done and what to do when things go wrong.
It seems that the current thinking in the computer world (not just
FBSD or M$) is that paper is obsolete, that the documentation
should be on-line. Am I the only one who notices that, if the
installation documentation is on-line, one cannot read it until
*after* installation? Of course the FBSD installation program does
have quite good help screens. The problem with such help (at least
for people with poor memory, like me) is that one cannot read them
while actually doing what they say. With paper documentation, I
can put the docs in my lap and check things off as I do them. I
can actually compare what the docs say with what is going on in the
installation process.
= Performance wise, I love FreeBSD over Win95.
And use wise.
I wish that I were a hot programmer so that I could contribute but
the best I can do is to buy my CDROMs from Walnut Creek and, so,
help a little that way. The efforts of the FBSD developers is
greatly appreciated.
= ken@tydfam.iijnet.or.jp
= Takeshi "Ken" Yamada
--
Best,
Charlie "Older than dirt" Sorsby "I'm the NRA!"
crs@swcp.com crs@hamlet.lanl.gov Life Member since 1965