On Tue, 2006-05-09 at 08:21 -0500, Roger Heflin wrote: > Jeff Vian wrote: > > On Mon, 2006-05-08 at 15:20 -0500, Les Mikesell wrote: > >> On Mon, 2006-05-08 at 15:10, Rahul Sundaram wrote: > >>>> It's not a bug, it is a design decision. > >>>> > >>>>> This is a user list...whining here is merely pissing in the wind. > >>>> That's only true if the designers don't care enough about users > >>>> to pay attention to the whining. > >>> Its not possible or efficient for developers and designers to read all > >>> the mails in the fedora-list to gather feedback. > >> OK, but does that differ greatly from what I said? A lot of > >> decisions seem to be made with no thought about the real-world > >> effects. For example if someone wanted to build PCs with > >> fedora pre-installed, what might the user expect to find on > >> it? > >> > > Whatever the "builder" chose to install. Doh! > > > > Which the safest choice is "install everything" since the builder > does not know exactly how the customer is going to use the machine. > Actually the better choice would be to install what *most* will use, and provide media with the rest so they can tailor the install to fit their needs. No Windows machine comes with ANY apps installed except those the builder chose to provide and that usually is something like microsoft works and some media apps. The flexibility and availability of apps for Linux is overpowering even for the expert user to keep up with. A newbie would be totally overwhelmed and would have no clue as to the number of apps installed if he was given 'everything'. The typical workstation or server install contains hundreds more apps than are readily available on a typical Windows install, even without 'everything'. > Roger >
