Re: [linuxiran] Libranet

[Aryan Ameri]

On Thursday 31 July 2003 12:23, Zoup wrote:
> guys ? take a look at :
> http://www.ofb.biz/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=251

Heh! I just read it :-)

And I have to say I don't necessarily agree with all that is written 
there. You see, Open for Business is one of the sites which I really 
enjoy reading, and I have even had contacts with it's editor in chief 
Timothy Buttler.

But I don't underestand why he so much emphesizes on customized deskotp 
experience. I actually hate this customized desktop experience. All 
major distros (RedHat, SuSE, Mandrake et all) spend a great deal of 
their time configuring and customizing the desktop enviroments. Things 
like changing the KDE splash screen, putting their Logo instead of 'K', 
and in case of RedHat, deleting "About KDE" from the help menu and all 
these kind of things.

Which in my opinion are all just useless. What is the wrong with you 
guys? Read Ian Murduck's article (the one I mentioned yesterday) and 
see why all these distros are getting it wrong.

And I really don't see how changing the KDE splash screen makes KDE more 
user friendly. 

Libranet on the other hand (like Debian and Gentoo) just ships the 
default KDE (same with other window managers). Instead of wasting their 
time designing a splash screen, they have put their time and effort in 
doing something usefull.

Yes it's true, Libranet doesn't give you a customized window manager. 
However that's a pro in my opinion, not a con. Libranet ships all major 
free software packages, and they make sure that they all work fine 
together. That is what a distro should do, not designing icons and 
splash screens. 

And unlike SuSE or RedHat, they have no problem crediting others for 
what they have done. For example they remind you everywhere in their 
menu, that they are using Debian. And they even have Debian's 
repositry's in apt's sources.list, and it just works as if you are 
using a debian (without all the hassle of configuring debian for 
desktopp, like changing permissions and etc)

Next thing, about the installer:

Yes guys, Libranet's installer is text based. However I really can't see 
why it is a disadvantage. 

Libranet's installer is clean, and simple, although text based. Why is 
it that everyone thinks that graphical installers are super cool, and 
everything text based is hard to use? 

Haven't you ever faced a graphical installer, in which you just don't 
know where to click? Because everything is messed up, and all those 
icons and buttons are undistinguishable? Let me tell you, a installer 
can be good, and it can be bad. It doesn't have anything to do with 
being text based or graphical based. We can have a bad graphical 
installer, and a good graphical installer, same goes for text based.

In case of Libranet, again instead of wasting their times on developing 
something eye-candy but useless, they have made something simple but 
something that also easily works. I am confident that any windows user 
can install Libranet with no problem at all. (well those that can 
install windows at least).

Libranet's installer is clean, polished, well documented, and simple. 
With great hardware auto detection. The fact that it is not graphical 
is no disadvantage. Sometimes it can even be a advantage for you.

Only if these reviewers put more emphesize on the overall experience, as 
opposed to how eye-candy something is.

There is an old proverb, saying "Don't judge a book but it's cover".

Cheers

-- 
/*  This time I will try to put
something nice here !!!      */
Aryan Ameri