Le 19/02/2015 05:43, Chris Murphy a écrit : > My personal view on installers is extremely biased toward the user > staying out of trouble, they shouldn't have to read documentation for > a GUI installer. A *user* never has to even see - or use - an installer. A USER has to USE a computer, by which I mean the applications he or she needs to get some work done. The person who gets to be confronted by an OS installer is not a user, it's an ADMIN, which is an entirely different thing. An ADMIN should RTFM (a lot) and know his way about what you call "esoteric things" earlier in this thread (disks, partitions, volumes). My company (http://www.microlinux.fr) installs complete Linux-based networks for schools, town halls, public libraries etc. here in South France. For now, most of my server and desktop solutions are based on a highly modified version of Slackware Linux, with some CentOS and some RHEL here and there. I'm currently planning on migrating everything to CentOS in the long run. One of the founding principles of my company is the constant SEPARATION BETWEEN USING A COMPUTER AND ADMINISTRATING IT. A user never ever has to worry about things that pertain to system administration, and it would be very wrong if he or she ever has to deal with such a thing as an installer. For what it's worth, some of my users don't even know that this thing that they're using every day is called Linux under the hood. To them, it's just the machine that's running things like their library management software, or whatever. So, as an admin, what I want from an installer is FLEXIBILITY... and not an "assistant" that reminds me of Microsoft Office's infamous Clippy and expects me to jump through burning loops to configure the system as I want it. Cheers, Niki -- Microlinux - Solutions informatiques 100% Linux et logiciels libres 7, place de l'église - 30730 Montpezat Web : http://www.microlinux.fr Mail : info at microlinux.fr Tél. : 04 66 63 10 32