Re: Ubuntu erased my whole hard drive

  • Thread starter Thread starter rodolfo.garcia44@gmail.com
  • Start date Start date
<spike1@freenet.co.uk> wrote in message
news:aeqfu4-0re.ln1@ridcully.ntlworld.com...
> In the sacred domain of comp.os.linux.advocacy,
> dennis@home <dennis@killspam.kicks-ass.net> didnst hastily scribble
> thusly:
>> 3.0,3.1,3.11,95,98,98se,nt,2000,xp,vista,soaris,fedora,unixware,ubuntu,rmx
>> and a few I have forgotten.
>> Which have you installed?
>
> Too many.
>
>> Do you doubt it?
>> Have you never installed windows?
>
> As I said, Too many times.
>
>>> Let's see some proof that linux didn't warn him then,
>>> shall we?
>
>
> Didn't think so.

If you are so sure it does you could show the warning.
The fact that I can't show the warning is just evidence that it doesn't
exist.
You really should try and get the logic correct before demanding evidence.
 
"Adam Albright" <AA@ABC.net> wrote in message
news:o5gah3lle5rev4826vsadfpc1hek0ishc4@4ax.com...
> On Tue, 16 Oct 2007 23:11:42 +0100, "dennis@home"
> <dennis@killspam.kicks-ass.net> wrote:
>
>>
>><spike1@freenet.co.uk> wrote in message
>
>>> No it isn't. Ever installed windows?
>>
>>3.0,3.1,3.11,95,98,98se,nt,2000,xp,vista,soaris,fedora,unixware,ubuntu,rmx
>>and a few I have forgotten.
>>Which have you installed?
>
> Still acting like a pompous ass aren't you. What's the matter, can't
> break an old bad habit?
>

Ho Crazy.
When do your doctors decide you have had enough free time?
 
dennis@home wrote:

>
> <spike1@freenet.co.uk> wrote in message
> news:aeqfu4-0re.ln1@ridcully.ntlworld.com...
>> In the sacred domain of comp.os.linux.advocacy,
>> dennis@home <dennis@killspam.kicks-ass.net> didnst hastily scribble
>> thusly:
>>>
3.0,3.1,3.11,95,98,98se,nt,2000,xp,vista,soaris,fedora,unixware,ubuntu,rmx
>>> and a few I have forgotten.
>>> Which have you installed?
>>
>> Too many.
>>
>>> Do you doubt it?
>>> Have you never installed windows?
>>
>> As I said, Too many times.
>>
>>>> Let's see some proof that linux didn't warn him then,
>>>> shall we?
>>
>>
>> Didn't think so.
>
> If you are so sure it does you could show the warning.

Well, why should he? People who have actually installed it know that it
exists.

> The fact that I can't show the warning is just evidence that it doesn't
> exist.

The "fact" that you can't show the warning is evidence that you are lying.
Or too stupid to even attempt a linux install. Or both

> You really should try and get the logic correct before demanding evidence.

Hilarious
--
Law of Probable Dispersal:
Whatever it is that hits the fan will not be evenly distributed.
 
On Oct 16, 11:44 pm, Peter Köhlmann .
wrote:
> dennis@home wrote:
>
> > The fact that I can't show the warning is just evidence that it doesn't
> > exist.
>
> The "fact" that you can't show the warning is evidence that you are lying.
> Or too stupid to even attempt a linux install. Or both

Ok, I never saw a warning. I started using computer since before
Apple ][
If some of you know, it is called the "Superboard", and I have used
computer for 25 years. I can program all the way from micro-code,
machine code, all the way to C, Java, Python, and Ruby.

Anyways, I didn't see any warning, and the Ubuntu tech support said
this is a bug that it didn't detect Vista.

Also, the word "Partition" may have a strong "erasing the whole hard
drive" connotation to the Linux guys. But it also may have a
"dividing the data" connotation to people. Depending on its usage,
sometimes people may think that it is merely creating a new partition
for the Linux installation. So between the two possible meanings, why
assuming there is absolutely no confusion and just go ahead with the
destructive action?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Summercool wrote:

> On Oct 16, 11:44 pm, Peter Köhlmann .
> wrote:
>> dennis@home wrote:
>>
>> > The fact that I can't show the warning is just evidence that it doesn't
>> > exist.
>>
>> The "fact" that you can't show the warning is evidence that you are
>> lying. Or too stupid to even attempt a linux install. Or both
>
> Ok, I never saw a warning. I started using computer since before
> Apple ][

Ah yes. And because of that you never saw a warning?

> If some of you know, it is called the "Superboard", and I have used
> computer for 25 years. I can program all the way from micro-code,
> machine code, all the way to C, Java, Python, and Ruby.

Big deal. If true at all. I strongly suspect that it is another outright lie
from you. And all that blather has nothing to do with any warnings, seen or
not

> Anyways, I didn't see any warning, and the Ubuntu tech support said
> this is a bug that it didn't detect Vista.

Really? Care to show us where you found that particular lie?

> Also, the word "Partition" may have a strong "erasing the whole hard
> drive" connotation to the Linux guys.

No, it has not. It has to do with the consequences. One of them being that
after partitioning, the FS has to be formatted. Particularly if it was NTFS
before

> But it also may have a "dividing the data" connotation to people.

It had *never* to do with "dividing data"
It was always about filesystems, not data

I don't care where you found that particularly absurd connotation, but it is
extremely idiotic

> Depending on its usage,
> sometimes people may think that it is merely creating a new partition
> for the Linux installation. So between the two possible meanings, why
> assuming there is absolutely no confusion and just go ahead with the
> destructive action?

Because that bloke actually clicked "OK"
After being introduced to an explanation what happens next
--
99% of lawyers give the rest a bad name.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
On Tue, 16 Oct 2007 22:25:41 -0400, caver1 wrote:

> Stephan Rose wrote:
>> On Tue, 16 Oct 2007 11:04:28 -0700, rodolfo.garcia44 wrote:
>>
>>> On Oct 16, 6:03 am, Summercool <Summercooln...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> After installing Ubuntu, it seemed that everything on my Drive C: was
>>>> lost.
>>>>
>>>> After hours of trying, it really turned out I lost EVERYTHING on my
>>>> C: drive.
>>>>
>>>> So I had to reformat the whole C: drive, and reinstall Vista on it.
>>>>
>>>> I lost all my bookmarks, in both IE and Firefox.
>>>>
>>>> I needed to reinstall every single application.
>>>>
>>>> I needed to reinstall all security update for Vista all over again.
>>>>
>>>> I wasted at least 5, 6 hours.
>>>>
>>>> How can "Ubuntu - Humanity towards others" erases people's whole hard
>>>> drive without a single warning?
>>>>
>>>> Think about it, some people may lose tens or hundreds of hours of
>>>> work, or 4, 5 years of photos and memories, just because Ubuntu
>>>> erases whole hard drive without warning.
>>>>
>>>> The following is the install option snapshot: IT NEVER warns you the
>>>> content in drive C: will be totally erased. What's more, it is set as
>>>> the DEFAULT ACTION. And it says it is "GUIDED":
>>>>
>>>> http://aycu03.webshots.com/image/32522/2001738602340396146_rs.jpg
>>
>> It says "Guided - Use entire disk".
>>
>> Now what particular part about "Use Entire Disk" is beyond your
>> comprehension?
>>
>>
>>
>
> There's also an option to use free space. caver1

Not on that screenshot there isn't.

I think the free space option only appears if there acutally *is* free
space that could be used in the first place or if there is a partition
that can be safely resized to make free space.

And then, the option will also be called such and won't be called "Use
entire disk".

--
Stephan
2003 Yamaha R6

å›ã®ã“ã¨æ€ã„出ã™æ—¥ãªã‚“ã¦ãªã„ã®ã¯
å›ã®ã“ã¨å¿˜ã‚ŒãŸã¨ããŒãªã„ã‹ã‚‰
 
"Adam Albright" <AA@ABC.net> wrote in message
news:j8gah3p9lebb67c6g3m0fr5heql6o6runf@4ax.com...
> On Tue, 16 Oct 2007 23:25:09 +0100, "dennis@home"
> <dennis@killspam.kicks-ass.net> wrote:
>
>>> Oh come on Dennis...
>>>
>>> What part about "Guided - Use entire disk" is difficult to understand? I
>>> mean it frigging says "entire disk" right next to it!!!
>>
>>Well that assumes the installer knows what a disk is to start with.
>
> You're really getting out of control. I know what your problem is. You
> simply can't stand to get corrected. Even when you are wrong. Why else
> you think I keep calling you a pompous jerk.

Because you are crazy thats why.
Didn't I make it plain enough for you?
Lets try again.

You are crazy.

>
> ROTFLMAO!
>
>>As I said before Linux expects the user to know too much.
>>It was written by geeks who either don't understand the target audience or
>>don't expect Linux to be used by the masses.
>
> Don't get me started on all the Microsoft screw ups. It would be a
> very long detailed list starting with illegal snooping on customer's
> computers reporting back to Redmond and marking legit copies of Vista
> as counterfeit. Just wondering, you REALLY want me to post such a
> list?

Do I care what you think of anything?
No not really. every time you open your mouth I think less of what you say.

>
> Face facts. You're nothing but another head up your ass Microsoft
> apologist that gets his shorts all bunched up any time anybody exposes
> what rubes Microsoft designers really are.

Lets face facts Adam you act crazy.
I don't know what you get out of appearing crazy so I assume you really are
crazy.
Have a nice day and remember to take the pills it will make everyone feel
better.

>
>>Also if you were truthful you would admit that Vista and XP ask twice
>>before
>>removing a partition and tell the user that it may contain data that will
>>be
>>lost if they do.
>
> Now you're cherry picking. How come you never want to face all the
> stupid things Vista does? You simply have no clue what being fair and
> balanced means. If you want to start nitpicking Linux or Macs, first
> clean up Microsoft's house. It's a mess. You know it too.

Maybe it because unlike you I am not an expert on Vista so I can hardly
pronounce upon it like you do.
However I am sure the vast majority recognise your expertise for waht it is
and act appropriatly.

>
>>It even asks twice before it will format one.
>>I suggest you dig out you windows disks and try an install as you appear
>>to
>>have forgotten what it does.
>
> I can't forget what a a-hole you always are. You make it impossible to
> forget.
>

At least I am not crazy like you Adam.
I doubt if I will be able to forget that either.. who did you say you were?
Do you have any significance here? I thought not.
 
"caver1" <caver@inthemud.com> wrote in message
news:eClxAUGEIHA.2004@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
> Stephan Rose wrote:
>> On Tue, 16 Oct 2007 11:04:28 -0700, rodolfo.garcia44 wrote:
>>
>>> On Oct 16, 6:03 am, Summercool <Summercooln...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> After installing Ubuntu, it seemed that everything on my Drive C: was
>>>> lost.
>>>>
>>>> After hours of trying, it really turned out I lost EVERYTHING on my C:
>>>> drive.
>>>>
>>>> So I had to reformat the whole C: drive, and reinstall Vista on it.
>>>>
>>>> I lost all my bookmarks, in both IE and Firefox.
>>>>
>>>> I needed to reinstall every single application.
>>>>
>>>> I needed to reinstall all security update for Vista all over again.
>>>>
>>>> I wasted at least 5, 6 hours.
>>>>
>>>> How can "Ubuntu - Humanity towards others" erases people's whole hard
>>>> drive without a single warning?
>>>>
>>>> Think about it, some people may lose tens or hundreds of hours of work,
>>>> or 4, 5 years of photos and memories, just because Ubuntu erases whole
>>>> hard drive without warning.
>>>>
>>>> The following is the install option snapshot: IT NEVER warns you the
>>>> content in drive C: will be totally erased. What's more, it is set as
>>>> the DEFAULT ACTION. And it says it is "GUIDED":
>>>>
>>>> http://aycu03.webshots.com/image/32522/2001738602340396146_rs.jpg
>>
>> It says "Guided - Use entire disk".
>>
>> Now what particular part about "Use Entire Disk" is beyond your
>> comprehension?
>>
>>
>
>
> There's also an option to use free space.
> caver1

This issue is down to what the target market for Linux is.
If it is to take over the desktop then it has to be targeted at the level of
a moron so that almost anyone can install it without getting unfixable
problems.
This means you can't assume the user understands what a disk is.. after all
a lot of people think the case is a CPU.

This is Linux's biggest problem.. too many developers and users over
estimate the knowledge of their target users.
Until the developers sort out the installation routines Linux will not be
mass market as it still relies on someone being able to download it and
install it.
Making it so that only ~5% of users can install it without problems stops
the ~95% from using it.
Linux developers haven't even worked out that users don't read manuals by
the sound of it.

Having worked in the telecoms industry I can assure you that you can *never*
underestimate how dumb users are (well at least a lot of them).
 
On Wed, 17 Oct 2007 09:14:46 +0100, dennis@home wrote:

> "caver1" <caver@inthemud.com> wrote in message
> news:eClxAUGEIHA.2004@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
>> Stephan Rose wrote:
>>> On Tue, 16 Oct 2007 11:04:28 -0700, rodolfo.garcia44 wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Oct 16, 6:03 am, Summercool <Summercooln...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> After installing Ubuntu, it seemed that everything on my Drive C:
>>>>> was lost.
>>>>>
>>>>> After hours of trying, it really turned out I lost EVERYTHING on my
>>>>> C: drive.
>>>>>
>>>>> So I had to reformat the whole C: drive, and reinstall Vista on it.
>>>>>
>>>>> I lost all my bookmarks, in both IE and Firefox.
>>>>>
>>>>> I needed to reinstall every single application.
>>>>>
>>>>> I needed to reinstall all security update for Vista all over again.
>>>>>
>>>>> I wasted at least 5, 6 hours.
>>>>>
>>>>> How can "Ubuntu - Humanity towards others" erases people's whole
>>>>> hard drive without a single warning?
>>>>>
>>>>> Think about it, some people may lose tens or hundreds of hours of
>>>>> work, or 4, 5 years of photos and memories, just because Ubuntu
>>>>> erases whole hard drive without warning.
>>>>>
>>>>> The following is the install option snapshot: IT NEVER warns you the
>>>>> content in drive C: will be totally erased. What's more, it is set
>>>>> as the DEFAULT ACTION. And it says it is "GUIDED":
>>>>>
>>>>> http://aycu03.webshots.com/image/32522/2001738602340396146_rs.jpg
>>>
>>> It says "Guided - Use entire disk".
>>>
>>> Now what particular part about "Use Entire Disk" is beyond your
>>> comprehension?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>> There's also an option to use free space. caver1
>
> This issue is down to what the target market for Linux is. If it is to
> take over the desktop then it has to be targeted at the level of a moron
> so that almost anyone can install it without getting unfixable problems.
> This means you can't assume the user understands what a disk is.. after
> all a lot of people think the case is a CPU.

Then why does Windows ask about partitioning and formatting when doing an
install?


>
> This is Linux's biggest problem.. too many developers and users over
> estimate the knowledge of their target users. Until the developers sort
> out the installation routines Linux will not be mass market as it still
> relies on someone being able to download it and install it.

Hopefully more vendors, especially visible ones like Dell, will start
shipping Linux pre-installed.


> Making it so that only ~5% of users can install it without problems
> stops the ~95% from using it.

How many people can properly install Windows?

> Linux developers haven't even worked out that users don't read manuals
> by the sound of it.

People don't read manuals when running any software, for the most part.
They don't read them when setting up stereos and VCRs, either.

>
> Having worked in the telecoms industry I can assure you that you can
> *never* underestimate how dumb users are (well at least a lot of them).


--
Rick
 
In article <13hbqqpq50pen00@news.supernews.com>, none@nomail.com says...
> Hopefully more vendors, especially visible ones like Dell, will start
> shipping Linux pre-installed.

Lets hope they wait until Linux has gained mass hardware support from
vendors so that customers are not limited.

--
Leythos - spam999free@rrohio.com (remove 999 to email me)

Fight exposing kids to porn, complain about sites like pcbutts1 that
create filth and put it on the web for any kid to see: Just take a look
at some of the FILTH he's created and put on his website:
http://forums.speedguide.net/archive/index.php/t-223485.html all exposed
to children (the link I've include does not directly display his filth).
You can find the same information by googling for 'PCBUTTS1' and
'exposed to kids'.
 
On Tue, 16 Oct 2007 15:52:59 -0700, Summercool wrote:

> I would say, no matter whether it is a bug in Ubuntu that it could not
> detect a pre-existing OS, or that it detects a pre-existing OS, in
> either case, give out a simple warning to the user

FYI If you have a Linux distro installed on a HD and try to install a
Windoze version, guess what? The Windoze version doesn't 'see' the Linux
distro.

--
John Brendan Doherty 1922-2007
Soldier, Father, Grandfather, Admirable man.
Requiescat in Pacem
 
dennis@home wrote:
>
> "caver1" <caver@inthemud.com> wrote in message
> news:eClxAUGEIHA.2004@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
>> Stephan Rose wrote:
>>> On Tue, 16 Oct 2007 11:04:28 -0700, rodolfo.garcia44 wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Oct 16, 6:03 am, Summercool <Summercooln...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> After installing Ubuntu, it seemed that everything on my Drive C: was
>>>>> lost.
>>>>>
>>>>> After hours of trying, it really turned out I lost EVERYTHING on my C:
>>>>> drive.
>>>>>
>>>>> So I had to reformat the whole C: drive, and reinstall Vista on it.
>>>>>
>>>>> I lost all my bookmarks, in both IE and Firefox.
>>>>>
>>>>> I needed to reinstall every single application.
>>>>>
>>>>> I needed to reinstall all security update for Vista all over again.
>>>>>
>>>>> I wasted at least 5, 6 hours.
>>>>>
>>>>> How can "Ubuntu - Humanity towards others" erases people's whole hard
>>>>> drive without a single warning?
>>>>>
>>>>> Think about it, some people may lose tens or hundreds of hours of
>>>>> work,
>>>>> or 4, 5 years of photos and memories, just because Ubuntu erases whole
>>>>> hard drive without warning.
>>>>>
>>>>> The following is the install option snapshot: IT NEVER warns you the
>>>>> content in drive C: will be totally erased. What's more, it is set as
>>>>> the DEFAULT ACTION. And it says it is "GUIDED":
>>>>>
>>>>> http://aycu03.webshots.com/image/32522/2001738602340396146_rs.jpg
>>>
>>> It says "Guided - Use entire disk".
>>>
>>> Now what particular part about "Use Entire Disk" is beyond your
>>> comprehension?
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> There's also an option to use free space.
>> caver1
>
> This issue is down to what the target market for Linux is.
> If it is to take over the desktop then it has to be targeted at the
> level of a moron so that almost anyone can install it without getting
> unfixable problems.
> This means you can't assume the user understands what a disk is.. after
> all a lot of people think the case is a CPU.
>
> This is Linux's biggest problem.. too many developers and users over
> estimate the knowledge of their target users.
> Until the developers sort out the installation routines Linux will not
> be mass market as it still relies on someone being able to download it
> and install it.
> Making it so that only ~5% of users can install it without problems
> stops the ~95% from using it.
> Linux developers haven't even worked out that users don't read manuals
> by the sound of it.
>
> Having worked in the telecoms industry I can assure you that you can
> *never* underestimate how dumb users are (well at least a lot of them).
>


If a a person has no idea what a disc is, let alone a partition, then
that person
has no business installing an OS. And if they do try without the proper
backups
and research, then they can't blame the OS no matter if it is
Linux,Windows or whatever.
caver1
 
Summercool wrote:

>Ok, Ubuntu's tech support people confirmed that it is a bug.

Prove it, google troll.
 
caver1 wrote:

> dennis@home wrote:
>>
< snip >

>>> There's also an option to use free space.
>>> caver1
>>
>> This issue is down to what the target market for Linux is.
>> If it is to take over the desktop then it has to be targeted at the
>> level of a moron so that almost anyone can install it without getting
>> unfixable problems.
>> This means you can't assume the user understands what a disk is.. after
>> all a lot of people think the case is a CPU.
>>
>> This is Linux's biggest problem.. too many developers and users over
>> estimate the knowledge of their target users.
>> Until the developers sort out the installation routines Linux will not
>> be mass market as it still relies on someone being able to download it
>> and install it.
>> Making it so that only ~5% of users can install it without problems
>> stops the ~95% from using it.
>> Linux developers haven't even worked out that users don't read manuals
>> by the sound of it.
>>
>> Having worked in the telecoms industry I can assure you that you can
>> *never* underestimate how dumb users are (well at least a lot of them).
>>
>
>
> If a a person has no idea what a disc is, let alone a partition, then
> that person
> has no business installing an OS. And if they do try without the proper
> backups
> and research, then they can't blame the OS no matter if it is
> Linux,Windows or whatever.

You are talking to dennis the "MD5 guru"

In short, it can't get any dumber and more clueless than him

--
Law of Probable Dispersal:
Whatever it is that hits the fan will not be evenly distributed.
 
On Wed, 17 Oct 2007 09:14:46 +0100, "dennis@home"
<dennis@killspam.kicks-ass.net> wrote:


>This issue is down to what the target market for Linux is.
>If it is to take over the desktop then it has to be targeted at the level of
>a moron so that almost anyone can install it without getting unfixable
>problems.
>This means you can't assume the user understands what a disk is.. after all
>a lot of people think the case is a CPU.
>
>This is Linux's biggest problem.. too many developers and users over
>estimate the knowledge of their target users.

I would never over estimate your knowledge or intelligence. How's
walking and chewing gum at the same time working out for you Dennis?
Do you know how to do it yet?

I keep telling you what your problem is. You disrespect everyone, call
them morons and fake being an expert yourself. Then you wonder why I
keep referring to you as some pompous jackass. You redefine the term
slow learner. That's because you don't see that's how you are thought
of here.

>Having worked in the telecoms industry I can assure you that you can *never*
>underestimate how dumb users are (well at least a lot of them).

Of course you think you're as smart as a pistol right? You keep
implying it. After all that's what you've been trying to tell us for
months now. Well sorry fool, I'm not buying your act. Neither will
anyone else. Well, maybe Frank will, he'll believe anything if you
first tell him Microsoft said so.
 
I have been a Linux user for 12 years and do not use Windows at
home. So I hope that this statement will make it clear that I am not a
Windows zealot.

Windows is not worth using for many reasons, but that does not mean
that Linux is perfect.

That said, it my firm opinion that though Linux install process has
made progress, it still SUCKS as far as

- Providing 100% clear, understandable instructions and help
- Giving user control over partitioning using a simple language (other
than /dev/sde1 etc)
- controlling settings of grub

Windows install sucks even more, of course, since it blows out other
operating systems without choice. But Linux setup sucks as well. It
needs to be addressed and worked on as a large project.

i
 
On Tue, 16 Oct 2007 23:25:09 +0100, dennis@home wrote:

> "Stephan Rose" <nospam@spammer.com> wrote in message
> news:yqqdneUOjLVLuojanZ2dnUVZ8s3inZ2d@giganews.com...
>> On Tue, 16 Oct 2007 21:02:16 +0100, dennis@home wrote:
>>
>>> "lee h" <noti@domain.invalid> wrote in message
>>> news:MM7Ri.10622$lD6.5170@newssvr27.news.prodigy.net...
>>>> rodolfo.garcia44@gmail.com wrote:
>>>>> On Oct 16, 6:03 am, Summercool <Summercooln...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>> After installing Ubuntu, it seemed that everything on my Drive C:
>>>>>> was lost.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>> For the simplest Ubuntu install on a windows box, use Wubi (Windows
>>>> Ubuntu Installer).
>>>
>>> Its a bit too late for that.
>>> The lack of a suitable warning has made sure another potential Linux
>>> user will stick with something else.
>>> This is the problem with Linux .. it is written by geeks who have no
>>> idea how simple it has to be for the mass market. Windows would have
>>> warned the user at least twice before removing a Linux partition and
>>> that would be after selecting the partition and saying delete.
>>
>> Oh come on Dennis...
>>
>> What part about "Guided - Use entire disk" is difficult to understand?
>> I mean it frigging says "entire disk" right next to it!!!
>
> Well that assumes the installer knows what a disk is to start with. If
> they select manual then they get presented with even more problems.

Someone that does NOT KNOW what a disk is has absolutely no business
installing an operating system. Windows included because you also have to
know what a disk and a partition is to install windows!

Else, how would one choose the appropriate disk/partition when installing
windows if one doesn't even know what that is?

>
>> How can you blame the OS Installer if the user is incapable of reading
>> the whole sentence?
>>
>> Also, the Ubuntu installer will show a list of partition / file system
>> changes it makes to what drives and what partition that the user has to
>> OK before actually doing it.
>>
>> So you can't even accidentally click continue and overwrite the system.
>> You need to do so twice.
>
> At no time does it actually tell the user that the data on their system
> will be lost if they proceed.

Really?

http://fosswire.com/wp-content/uploads/2007/04/
ubuntufeistyinstallpicture-8.png

Same URL tiny:
http://tinyurl.com/2qc234

Then please explain to me the meaning of this sentence on the screenshot
above:

"WARNING: This will destroy all data on any partitions you have removed
as well as on the partitions that are going to be formatted."

> As I said before Linux expects the user to know too much. It was written
> by geeks who either don't understand the target audience or don't expect
> Linux to be used by the masses.

It isn't too much to expect someone to know how their computer works if
they're going to install an OPERATING SYSTEM on it. Installing an OS
isn't installing notepad for crying out loud! And this is no different
installing Vista or XP!

>
>> Also, how is this different from installing XP or Vista?
>>
>> Last time I checked, XP and Vista also give you just a list of drives /
>> partitions and you just go pick one to install on, or you can manually
>> configure the partitions. How is that any different? Except of course
>> Vista or XP don't ask a second time just to make sure you didn't make a
>> mistake. I suppose that is one difference.
>
> Except that they will not remove the data from a partition without
> warning the user unlike what you state above. Also if you were truthful
> you would admit that Vista and XP ask twice before removing a partition
> and tell the user that it may contain data that will be lost if they do.
> It even asks twice before it will format one. I suggest you dig out you
> windows disks and try an install as you appear to have forgotten what it
> does.

Allright fair enough. I honestly try to avoid installing Windows as much
as possible as I don't like calling India for activation. So windows does
ask twice. Come to think of it, I think I now recall what you are
referring to. I stand corrected there, no problem.

So ultimately it now comes down to that the Windows Install procedure is
identical to the Ubuntu Install procedure.

- Choose time / keyboard / localization settings.
- Choose disk / partition.
- Install.

The only differences may be the order in which the questions are asked,
bid deal...that isn't of any relevance.

--
Stephan
2003 Yamaha R6

å›ã®ã“ã¨æ€ã„出ã™æ—¥ãªã‚“ã¦ãªã„ã®ã¯
å›ã®ã“ã¨å¿˜ã‚ŒãŸã¨ããŒãªã„ã‹ã‚‰
 
On Wed, 17 Oct 2007 08:12:30 -0500, Ignoramus27577 wrote:

> I have been a Linux user for 12 years and do not use Windows at home. So
> I hope that this statement will make it clear that I am not a Windows
> zealot.
>
> Windows is not worth using for many reasons, but that does not mean that
> Linux is perfect.
>
> That said, it my firm opinion that though Linux install process has made
> progress, it still SUCKS as far as
>
> - Providing 100% clear, understandable instructions and help - Giving
> user control over partitioning using a simple language (other than
> /dev/sde1 etc)
> - controlling settings of grub

Well what do you suggest it should use?

Should my drive listing look like this?

"The big black box in slot number 1 in the big case under my desk?"
"The big black box in slot number 2 in the big case under my desk?"
"The big black box in slot number 3 in the big case under my desk?"

Honestly I find

/dev/sda
/dev/sdb
/dev/sdc

To be perfectly fine and reasonable. If someone can't deal with that
naming convention they have little business installing an OS. The only
way that could be removed is via a recovery disk that is intended to
restore an entire PC to factory defaults.

Now that said, I agree that configuring grub could be made a bit easier.
Not that I ever have a need to do so, but I suppose if someone does have
a need to do so or wants other settings than the default, the installer
could give some options regarding setting up grub.

Overall though, I find the Ubuntu installer to be reasonably well done.
I've definitely seen and used far worse and I've yet to see someone do it
better.

--
Stephan
2003 Yamaha R6

å›ã®ã“ã¨æ€ã„出ã™æ—¥ãªã‚“ã¦ãªã„ã®ã¯
å›ã®ã“ã¨å¿˜ã‚ŒãŸã¨ããŒãªã„ã‹ã‚‰
 
Stephan Rose wrote:
> On Tue, 16 Oct 2007 22:25:41 -0400, caver1 wrote:
>
>> Stephan Rose wrote:
>>> On Tue, 16 Oct 2007 11:04:28 -0700, rodolfo.garcia44 wrote:
>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> http://aycu03.webshots.com/image/32522/2001738602340396146_rs.jpg
>>> It says "Guided - Use entire disk".
>>>
>>> Now what particular part about "Use Entire Disk" is beyond your
>>> comprehension?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>> There's also an option to use free space. caver1
>
> Not on that screenshot there isn't.
>
> I think the free space option only appears if there acutally *is* free
> space that could be used in the first place or if there is a partition
> that can be safely resized to make free space.
>
> And then, the option will also be called such and won't be called "Use
> entire disk".
>


I think you are right but wasn't sure enough to say that.
 
On Wed, 17 Oct 2007 07:27:23 +0100, dennis@home wrote:

> <spike1@freenet.co.uk> wrote in message
> news:aeqfu4-0re.ln1@ridcully.ntlworld.com...
>> In the sacred domain of comp.os.linux.advocacy, dennis@home
>> <dennis@killspam.kicks-ass.net> didnst hastily scribble thusly:
>>>
3.0,3.1,3.11,95,98,98se,nt,2000,xp,vista,soaris,fedora,unixware,ubuntu,rmx
>>> and a few I have forgotten.
>>> Which have you installed?
>>
>> Too many.
>>
>>> Do you doubt it?
>>> Have you never installed windows?
>>
>> As I said, Too many times.
>>
>>>> Let's see some proof that linux didn't warn him then, shall we?
>>
>>
>> Didn't think so.
>
> If you are so sure it does you could show the warning. The fact that I
> can't show the warning is just evidence that it doesn't exist.
> You really should try and get the logic correct before demanding
> evidence.

http://fosswire.com/wp-content/uploads/2007/04/
ubuntufeistyinstallpicture-8.png

Same URL tiny:
http://tinyurl.com/2qc234

--
Stephan
2003 Yamaha R6

å›ã®ã“ã¨æ€ã„出ã™æ—¥ãªã‚“ã¦ãªã„ã®ã¯
å›ã®ã“ã¨å¿˜ã‚ŒãŸã¨ããŒãªã„ã‹ã‚‰
 
Back
Top