On Dec 23, 2007 10:37 AM, Tim <ignored_mailbox@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Tim: > >> I listened to the whole thing, and all the did was complain about how it > >> looked. The theme, the layout for the installer, how the options were > >> presented to you to partition the drive, etc. > > Arthur Pemberton: > > Then I guess we listened to different clips. Because all what you > > mentioned there was just about Anaconda, and not even about the rest > > of Fedora which they did in fact talk about. > > They spent quite a lot of time on that, but the overall comment was > about how they thought it *looked*. Overall, it doesn't look ready, > etc. > > Whilst other things got *some* mention, all the way through their little > radio show, that was the repeated comment regarding just about > everything. In response to their review a bit... I would love to see a more interesting, anaconda: changing the look might help to, but I'm not much of a designs, however Anaconda does look plain, I just don't happen to have a problem with a plain look. If anyone is really interested in my idea(s), I may be able to put together a flow chart. However, that aside, I agree almost completely with their view that Fedora has a bit of an identity crisis. Consider this question... what is Fedora for? Here are the responses I come up with if I were to answer this: * testing ground for RHEL/CentOS * testing ground for new software in general * pure open source workstation * for those that happen to like Fedora And as you may notice, that last one is a bit recursive. I think it is fair to say that Fedora is not for the following for different reasons: * production server * desktop of even an average linux user * embedded systems I happen to use Fedora as my primary desktop myself, which easily meets more of my multimedia needs that my Windows XP laptop. -- Fedora 7 : sipping some of that moonshine ( www.pembo13.com )
