On Sat, May 2, 2009 at 11:01 AM, Dag Wieers dag@centos.org wrote:
On Fri, 1 May 2009, Scott Silva wrote:
on 5-1-2009 12:19 PM Alan Bartlett spake the following:
On 01/05/2009, Marcus Moeller mail-7BlZPJ8e1eab+SiqwsCprbNAH6kLmebB@public.gmane.org wrote:
So it becomes effectively useless for everyone with a netbook/laptop and needs wireless ? I cannot use the LiveCD unless I somehow transfer the firmware (or remake the LiveCD), you loose users, hurt the project.
I am not sure if missing netbook support leads in loosing our audience.
Result: Another potential user lost.
Surely that didn't really need to be spelt out for you, Marcus?
The opposite would also be true... Novice tries CentOS live CD and says "Wow, this works great. I want to install CentOS!". Several hours later as he DL's the CD's to install it ,"Now this piece of @#&% doesn't work". Also into the trash...
So you prefer someone whose hardware would work on CentOS not use CentOS because he is under the impression that it does not work.
Some people I know have said something around the lines of: "I tried the CentOS live CD and it didn't, work so I used Ubuntu"
Seems counter-productive. And yes there is a good reason to run an enterprise linux on a netbook or a laptop. Saying there are better alternatives is a very personal statement.
I use CentOS on my laptop and I would never want to change :)
The problem I see with having a live CD that includes all the 3rd party repros is that it will be a lot of work and people will not notice that there is a difference between "base" and "extended". So why not go with 2 different CDs one like it is now the "base" and then have a second one that has all the 3rd party packages enabled and is clearly labeled as such. I am aware that this will be more work to produce.
Cheers Didi