Progeny Announces Graphical Installer for Debian Woody 231
jdaily writes "In light of recent negative reviews of Debian in which the installer was roundly criticized, this announcement may have particular timeliness and relevance: Progeny has made available an i386 Debian 3.0 (woody) installer
image based on PGI, the Progeny Graphical Installer. This is
available at Progeny's free software archive." I've installed Debian so many times that I've just learned to cope with the installer, but this is a much needed boost.
The default debian installer is intimidating (Score:2, Insightful)
I love debians installer (Score:3, Insightful)
I think ill just stick to (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:I love debians installer (Score:1, Insightful)
Decent systems, like Debian or FreeBSD, you only install once!
Greet,
Jorgen Maas
cross-platform? (Score:5, Insightful)
If Debian remains true to it's high standards, no graphical installer will make it into a stable distribution unless it works for every platform supported by Debian.
So, sure, go ahead, use the Progeny one... but do make it work on (Ultra)Sparc, Alpha, Amiga, Atari ST, PA/RISC, S390, whatever... not so easy, is it?
Guys, remember, there's more to Linux than just x86!
Comment removed (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Plese don't ever make this the default (Score:3, Insightful)
Does the graphical frontend actually offer any significant additions over the text one?
Consistency for starters. There is no consistency in the way that the pieces of the current Debian text installer work. And that "thing" to select various packages is the worst console application I have ever seen - unintuitive, slow and a nightmare to navigate.
Chris
Re:What ? (Score:2, Insightful)
Installers are *always* the first thing that people meet in a distribution. Doesn't matter how similar the underlying OS is to other products, if the installer appears to be unfriendly or asks questions that people don't understand they aren't going to get a lot further.
I found this when I moved from RedHat to Debian, it took me a few goes to work out what exactly the installation process was asking for. I would only recommend Debian to people who really understand both linux and their hardware, anyone else would just be put off before they even got the distribution up and running.
People can argue about why one distribution is 'better' than another, but one of RedHat's strengths is that it is a pretty-much automated install and the bits that require the user to tell the install process ask questions that the user can understand.
Oh no, a graphical installer (Score:2, Insightful)
Ok, so the text-installer *works*, but that's just bearly. You will have to work a lot of things out by yourself, specially when it comes to hardware detection.
As it is today, it seems like Debian is only for people with an already extended knowledge about Linux, and these people wants to keep the difficult ancient text-only installer to "keep the newbies away" from Debian, and make it a distro for the experts.
This is not the right way. Linux should be for *everybody*, not just those who can understand the way-too-difficuly installer.
The best would of course be to have both at graphical installer AND the text-only installer. Then the hardcore Debian users could still use the text-only installer since they seem to like it so much, and we mortals could use the nice GUI installer. Then both partys would be happy.
Why isn't it so already?
Re:I love debians installer (Score:1, Insightful)
An ideal install would ask all the questions at the start then get on with the install.
Re:They should have done this a long time ago (Score:5, Insightful)
Then, When that becomes too limiting, move on to debian. At that point debian installer is not confusing, but raher powerful. (I just installed debian from scratch after disk failure, so I know what I'm talking about). That install of mine was first in 3-4 years.
Re:cross-platform? (Score:5, Insightful)
On the other hand, refusing to provide a graphical installer because it doesn't work on all supported hardware isn't a sensible attitude only. There are items of hardware that are never going to support a graphical install (I've a Sun with no framebuffer here) - should Debian refuse to allow graphical installs as a result?
Re:Debian installation difficulties are exaggerate (Score:3, Insightful)
No, no, I don't think so. The people complained about Debian not because of tasksel. After all, tasksel is just a bit more difficult than Redhat "install type". They complained it because there are so many things that Debian don't configure, and don't provide any interface to install other than reading HOWTOs.
See how sound is unconfigured, CD-RWs can't be written to, firewall accessible only to people with a text editor and time reading the long iptable doc, and even things as basic as setting date and time has no interface other than firing date and hwclock.
Don't get me wrong, Debian is now in everything I use regularly, and I love it the current way. After all, I don't have to do a system install until the next time I buy a new computer. But it is undeniable that Debian is not the easiest thing to put into your computer.
it still asks a lot of stupid questions (Score:3, Insightful)
There are only very few questions that the installer really, really needs to ask the user, and for those, a text interface should be sufficient.
Want to really convert the Windows crowd? (Score:2, Insightful)
Red Hat was much simpler, and did a better job at probing and giving me reasonable defaults. It still had some goofs - but I was able to get the system running at a baseline so that I was fixing things "within" the system rather than from the outside.
Getting the installer "right" with reasonable guidance for the newbie, and options to override for the expert, seems to be one of the seemingly simple but incredibly difficult things that most distributions still need to get right.
Of course, the other thing I would like to see most distributions understand is that many people are bringing Linux into a Windows world. So having support from the install for Windows networks (mapped drives and authentication) would make it much easier to put on more desktops.
My
Re:Why now? (Score:5, Insightful)
What, then, would be the point of Debian? What you are describing is just about every other commercial distro out there - so why do we need another one? Debian works this way because there is a need for a distro that works this way. The commercial ones won't, because as you pointed out, there's no demand, so what's wrong with debian doing so? It fills a gap, albeit a very small gap, that no other distro does, and that makes it priceless. If you don't like Debian, use something else, but I don't see why it bothers you what they do - they're not asking you for money, or time, or anything. They're just doing there own thing. You don't start harping on about the local table-tennis club because, let's face it no-one plays table tennis - hey, why don't they play football or basketball or something "normal"? I think the simple answer is that they don't want to, and while they're not playing table-tennis in the middle of your football field, why should you care? If the table-tennis club exists it's because at least 2 people want to play table tennis.
More important... (Score:3, Insightful)
What we need is more enhancements to the 3.0 one -- i.e. better hardware detection, more linear structure, easier questions etc. Text mode is fine, as early RH installers proved.
Oh, and as for dselect: as others have pointed out, you don't have to use it. I've installed Debian 2.1 and 2.2 on some old laptops recently, and I just quit out of it straight away and use "dpkg -i" for whatever files I need.
Quality of reviews is decreasing. (Score:3, Insightful)
I am a 3 years Debian user (Redhat and Mdk before). Recently, I wanted to have a look on other distro in order to see the global improvement and how they perform in daily desktop usage.
To save time, I started to have a look at all this review on RedHat and Mdk (I use debian unstable everyday so no need for a review
The installer is difficult? (Score:1, Insightful)
With a week of linux experience in Mandrake I successfully installed Debian first try. I've done it several times since then. The only thing I can see is that people are put off by screens that don't have pretty little modern guis. That's the only reason I can fish out of people that find deselect so hard(who are generally the same ones who dislike the debian installer).
I'm happy that the people that wanted a gui have gotten a gui. Now they have to get around the programs like aptitude, dselect, or maybe even use a *gasp* terminal.
Re:Oh no, a graphical installer (Score:2, Insightful)
This is not the right way. Linux should be for *everybody*, not just those who can understand the way-too-difficuly installer.
You're confusing Linux with Debian GNU/Linux. All the Debian users I know (it's been a long time since I last made the mistake of attending a LUG meeting so it's been a while since I met any) don't use it because it's easy. In fact, they get perverse pleasure out of the fact that a lot of people don't use it.
They love to bad mouth anyone who doesn't use it, badgering them into trying it. Then when the would be convert reverts back to their previous distro in disgust, the beardies simply get all smug and superior. These Debian users (I'll give the developers the benefit of the doubt, although the only one of them I know is an arrogant tosser), are the the spiritual brothers of real ale fanatics. In fact, at the local LUG there is an unsurprising correlation between CAMRA and LUG membership. The kind of c*nts who'll drink something that smells and most likely tastes like bear piss (I've tried real ale but not bear wee, so the comparison is supposition) just becasue it makes them a minority.
Chris
Re:They should have done this a long time ago (Score:3, Insightful)
The debian installer IS confusing. I can use it, but it IS confusing. It is possible to create GUI's that contain both power and finess, most simply as a choise between proceeding with a GUI install or an ncurses based one.
The idea that it's ok to leave the debian installer challenging because debian should only be used by 'qualified' people is obsurd. The product should appeal to as many people as it can w/o loosing it's power. A simple installer would go a long way for that.
Re:Why now? (Score:1, Insightful)
Re:cross-platform? (Score:3, Insightful)
Yes, cross-platform (Score:3, Insightful)
Why not? Debian is a "by the users, for the users" kind of noncommercial distribution. Compatibility with minority architectures may not be important to you, but it is a stated goal of Debian, and it is something that the developers and packagers wrangle with on a regular basis.
Branden Robinson, the XFree86 maintainer for Debian, has XFree86 running on more architectures than the XFree people themselves officially support -- his packages are the "de facto portabiltiy standard" for XFree86.
If you think progress is being "held up", then contribute to development on the arches you want supported, and let the developers who want to work on the minority platforms do so. Because they're not going away any time soon.
Jay (=