PDA

View Full Version : Bottom Line: It's Got To Be EASY to Install



Uncle Spellbinder
April 17th, 2010, 04:44 AM
My view has always been, in order to gain Windows converts to Linux, the distro MUST be easy to install (particularly on dual boot). Ubuntu is ridiculously easy to install. Create an amount of unallocated space and choose that option on install. Wait a few minutes > done and dual booting.

What other distros fall into the "easy to install" category?

Hman242
April 17th, 2010, 05:36 AM
I thought openSUSE was incredibly easy to install, easy than Ubuntu. I think if Ubuntu had a graphical installer then more people would install it.

switch10
April 17th, 2010, 06:00 AM
I thought openSUSE was incredibly easy to install, easy than Ubuntu. I think if Ubuntu had a graphical installer then more people would install it.

graphical installer? It has one, if you are not using the alternate disk...

...and I agree, extremely easy..

cariboo
April 17th, 2010, 06:14 AM
Only a very small sub-set of computer users install their own OS, most people stick with what came installed on their system when they bought it. The only way to spread Linux usage is for OEM's to give people a choice of a well setup Linux variant or the current version of Windows.

As long as people have to install a Linux variant themselves, it will remain an option only for nerds/enthusiasts.

Genius314
April 17th, 2010, 06:25 AM
I agree with Cariboo907.

And yeah, I think the Ubuntu installation is easier than the Windows installation. It's faster, too. Windows' installation never seems to end - there's always another step to complete, another prompt to reboot... Ubuntu just has a few quick steps, a 10-20 minute wait, and then you can boot right into it.

toupeiro
April 17th, 2010, 07:18 AM
I agree with Cariboo907.

And yeah, I think the Ubuntu installation is easier than the Windows installation. It's faster, too. Windows' installation never seems to end - there's always another step to complete, another prompt to reboot... Ubuntu just has a few quick steps, a 10-20 minute wait, and then you can boot right into it.


Agreed. Personally, I thought RHEL4 was easier to install than Windows XP. Linux has been easy to install for a while. How many people who have actually done bare metal installs of modern linux think windows is actually easier to install?

dsavi
April 17th, 2010, 07:24 AM
The hardest things about installing Linux, in my opinion, is not the actual install process, but creating unallocated space in Windows and burning the CD. My uncle asked me recently about installing Ubuntu, and I think it was about then that I realized I dreaded trying to explain to him (He lives thousands of miles away, can't go there and do it myself) how to partition his hard drive.

And burning CDs on Windows is just annoying, I think I've put an ISO on a disk instead of actually making the disk I wanted more than once.

toupeiro
April 17th, 2010, 07:29 AM
The hardest things about installing Linux, in my opinion, is not the actual install process, but creating unallocated space in Windows and burning the CD.

And burning CDs on Windows is just annoying, I think I've put an ISO on a disk instead of actually making the disk I wanted more than once.


But this is by way of the decision made on HOW to install linux, which in turn if I recall properly (It's been a long time since I've done a vanilla windows install), The windows OS installer doesn't have a mechanism to do this unless you are very good at the windows CLI. Ubuntu offers one of the easiest dual-boot configurations I've seen personally, and I've been dual-booting since MS-DOS/win95 days.

I'm not sure its fair to make the choice to have a dual-boot system, and say linux has a confusing way of setting it up, unless you have some examples from another OS thats any easier? If you chose to install linux the same way most people install windows, I'd venture to say that most people would tell you the linux installer is way easier.

dsavi
April 17th, 2010, 07:31 AM
I believe Mac OS X makes it very easy to understand, never tried it myself but I saw a picture of the partitioning interface and it looked quite easy.

And anyway I'm not blaming Linux really, more blaming Windows' partitioning tools. :P

3rdalbum
April 17th, 2010, 07:32 AM
The hardest things about installing Linux, in my opinion, is not the actual install process, but creating unallocated space in Windows and burning the CD.

You don't need to create unallocated space in Windows. In fact, I wouldn't even try; resizing a partition that your computer is running from doesn't sound very safe!

Instead, I'd just let the Ubuntu installer resize the partition. It can do that.

toupeiro
April 17th, 2010, 07:33 AM
You don't need to create unallocated space in Windows. In fact, I wouldn't even try; resizing a partition that your computer is running from doesn't sound very safe!

Instead, I'd just let the Ubuntu installer resize the partition. It can do that.

And lets not forget, there's Wubi! a.k.a. don't repartition at all! To me, thats like cheese in a can.. eeeeaaasssyyy.

cariboo
April 17th, 2010, 07:52 AM
I use a custom made Windows XP iso slipsteamed up to SP3 it's based on a white-box OEM version, and even then it takes several hours to get all the updates, I haven't built a custom iso for Win7 yet, but it's om my list of things to do, as MS seems to leave quite a bit out.

On the other hand, I just installed the Lucid Thursday daily build, it took an hour to install, update and customize. It is easy to install, but I've done it so often, i could do it in my sleep.

I've been using Linux for so long, that when I installed Windows on one of my own systems, I always gave Windows 40-50% of the drive and left the rest of the drive empty. I don't bother with Windows/Linux dual boot any more, as I have enough computers that a couple of them can run Windows only.

3rdalbum
April 17th, 2010, 10:49 AM
And lets not forget, there's Wubi! a.k.a. don't repartition at all! To me, thats like cheese in a can.. eeeeaaasssyyy.

I wouldn't recommend Wubi, myself. If Windows crashes and refuses to boot, then the NTFS partition has been unmounted uncleanly, and Ubuntu can't start up either. You lose access to BOTH operating systems, and you have to get Windows running again before you can boot Ubuntu.

...Yes it happens quite a bit.

XubuRoxMySox
April 17th, 2010, 11:29 AM
In before Arch


I have Debian installed, graphically, nearly as effortless as Ubuntu was to install. The biggest difference I think may be hardware detection, but Debian picked up all my hardware automagically.

Appreciating simplicity,
Robin

Soldierboy
April 17th, 2010, 01:38 PM
Agreed. Its gotta be easy to install. And it is nowadays. Never used to be! I badly wish I could find some screen shots of installing the first versions of Suse. Talk about a nightmare. You needed to enter starting and ending SECTORS of your HD that you wanted to install the partition to. What else...assigning IRQs to each and every piece of hardware...those are two things that really stood out to me. You almost needed to be an electrical engineer to get up and running.

zalittle
April 17th, 2010, 02:19 PM
I am running Windows 7 on this PC which I installed myself. After partitioning the hard drive, I downloaded Ubuntu and burned the bootable image to disc. Rebooted my PC and wham Ubuntu started to install. I did notice a learning curve when manually choosing what to load on my empty partition through advanced settings. Got the right one and installed. Loaded my ATI drivers and codecs for sound, flash,adobe and Java.

It was extremely easy for me,but I am no spring chicken as I have been building my own PC's for at least 10 years. I must admit, for the average user the learning curve may be well beyond their capabilities which reduces their confidence to plod through with configuring.
1st System-Windows 7 / Ubuntu / I5-750@ 3.6 Ghz / MSI P55-GD85 / 4 GB Corsair 1600 Mhz / XFX Radeon 5850 / Silverstone Element 750 watt PSU / Cooler Master CM690 II advanced case with Hyper 212 plus / 1 TB Caviar Black

2nd System- Windows XP / AMD xp 2600@ 2.2Ghz / Asus A7N8X / 1.5 gb Kingston PC3200 / 3-150 gb Maxtor IDE / MSI Video Capture Card / XFX 7600 GS /

RATM_Owns
April 17th, 2010, 02:33 PM
Arch and Gentoo are easy to install.

[Is not trolling.]

Uncle Spellbinder
April 17th, 2010, 02:49 PM
Only a very small sub-set of computer users install their own OS, most people stick with what came installed on their system when they bought it. The only way to spread Linux usage is for OEM's to give people a choice of a well setup Linux variant or the current version of Windows.

As long as people have to install a Linux variant themselves, it will remain an option only for nerds/enthusiasts.
I agree to a point. You are spot on when you say OEM's should give people a choice of a well setup Linux variant or the current version of Windows. But I think that nowadays, it's less of nerd/enthusiast thing to install and OS than it use to be. With the ease of install of many distros, the option to try a Linux OS is far more a likely option than in years past. And though Ubuntu is by no means the only choice, I think Ubuntu has done a world of good in getting the word out on how easy it can be to get up and running with a new OS.

Khakilang
April 17th, 2010, 02:54 PM
Its easier to install than Windows. For one you don't have to key in the product key. Just answer all the question and that it.

toupeiro
April 17th, 2010, 03:54 PM
I wouldn't recommend Wubi, myself. If Windows crashes and refuses to boot, then the NTFS partition has been unmounted uncleanly, and Ubuntu can't start up either. You lose access to BOTH operating systems, and you have to get Windows running again before you can boot Ubuntu.

...Yes it happens quite a bit.

.......... But its cheese in a can??!

I hear, and agree with, what you are saying, but this is a whole 'having your cake, and eating it too' debate. Personally, I think the ubuntu installer is as easy a concept as water and dirt make mud, but some people just want the mud without the work. Well, thats Wubi. Yes, there are other things that can go wrong, but if repartitioning scares you, here's your solution. In most cases I've seen, a simple boot to windows fixes most if not all NTFS freakouts you're talking about.

jrothwell97
April 17th, 2010, 03:59 PM
Perhaps something that works a little bit like Wubi could be developed to download and burn a disk image automatically.

Penguin Guy
April 17th, 2010, 05:29 PM
Ubuntu is ridiculously easy to install. Create an amount of unallocated space and choose that option on install. Wait a few minutes > done and dual booting.

What other distros fall into the "easy to install" category?
Keep in mind, most users have never heard of a 'partition' or 'swap space' - this can make the installation rather more confusing.

Hman242
April 17th, 2010, 05:39 PM
graphical installer? It has one, if you are not using the alternate disk...

...and I agree, extremely easy..
I always get the alternative.