On 13 Feb 00 at 22:32, Geurt Vos wrote:
> You can always make a wish. But what I need are good reasons why I
> should create a text-mode vesrion of XOSL.
First, I was going to say what Allan Crooks replied: "It would be
useful if your monitor had broken down, and you had to resort to an
old monitor to get it working...."
And I couldn't have come up with a better reason than the one
Andy Elkington supplied: A textmode interface would be very
useful in mixed environments. Andy could of course have
settled for an existing textmode boot manager as the "least common
denominator". But I think he offered a pretty good reason for why
he didn't want that, don't you think?
> I mean, there are enough good and free text-mode boot managers
> out there. Why not use one of those instead?
Yes, there are others, and of those I have tried, I found non
as good as your XOSL. I am sure other boot managers can perform
just a well as XOSL in brining up my Operating Systems, but at least
I haven't seen any which are that easy to use - AND - also have all
features. (Ranish advanced boot manager is a good candidate I would
say, but I got the impression it is not quite finished yet, and the
prior version of his partitioner somehow doesn't recognize all my
logical partitions - although the boot manager still works)
Ease of use is an important factor I think. For some - maybe most
people, a boot manager will be something you install and forget, not
counting the fact you use it to make the selection on every boot, if
no autoboot is set. It is basically out of sight and out of mind as
long as it is operating as it is supposed to - until the next
time you install a new OS or for any other reason need to make
changes to your setup. Lets say that 6 months after you installed you
need to do some small adjustments. Then who likes having to read 10
man pages just to do a simple change of setup? Not that it is
necessarily difficult, just time consuming. It is nice then, if the
boot manager is pretty easy to use, if it doesn't take you long to
figure out or remember how to configure it, and it still has all the
features you need! Do I need to say I think XOSL more than lives up
to this description? Do I need to say that the other boot managers I
have seen doesn't ? :)
So, why do I want to "loose the GUI" when I have said so many nice
things about it? Well I don't want to loose it, only supplement
it with an optional text mode interface for hardware platforms that
doesn't support the GUI mode, where AFAIK no other "as easy" an
alternative exist, cf. reasons above.
In another message you said:
> One thing I will do is create a nice XOSL-bypass menu.
> It will still be quite feature-less, but it will be
> easier to use.
If you by this mean bring up a simple alternative text mode
"OS-selection screen" on boot, it sounds great to me. I mentioned
XOSL to a friend of mine, and he said "I noticed it had some hefty
requirements unrelated to it's purpose". But I have to disagree with
him. If the purpose only is booting, then I would have to agree. But
if the purpose also is making configuration easy, intuitive and
accessible, then I disagree. Still, even if
the GUI IS very nice _when configuring the setup_, IMHO it is not
needed when all you want to do is to select what OS to run. It
would be nice then with a simple - but optional - textmode boot
selection screen, with a HOT-key to bring up the GUI (or textmode ;)
configuration screen only when needed. That would probably also make
the boot even smoother and faster than it already is.
But of course, making wishes and passing suggestions is easy, doing
the work and investing the time needed to implement the changes is
another thing. I fully acknowledge that. So let me emphasis again,
your XOSL is a very nice program, and already very good and
useful "as is".
All the best,