[arch-general] Good press at distrowatch.com

[Brendan Long]

On 12/17/2009 04:22 PM, Ng Oon-Ee wrote:
> On Thu, 2009-12-17 at 20:49 +0100, Dieter Plaetinck wrote:
>   
>> On Thu, 17 Dec 2009 12:40:03 -0700
>> Brendan Long <korin43 at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>     
>>>  Isn't the Arch installer always graphical, with a menu and stuff?
>>> Just because you use your keyboard instead of a mouse and it doesn't
>>> use X doesn't really make it any less user-friendly does it?
>>>       
>> no. it can also do fully automated installations.
>>
>> but it's a quite recent feature so I don't blame anyone for not knowing
>> it.  (take my previous reactions with a grain of salt and some humor ;)
>>
>> Dieter
>>     
> It does fully automated? Haven't looked at the installer since
> installing (go figure).
>
> Ubuntu's installer goes much faster though, if the benchmark is 'to a
> working gnome system', especially for those of us with slow internet
> connections who aren't able to download half a Gb here and there at the
> snap of a finger. Nothing to do with the point-and-click, more about the
> fact that with Arch you do have to download pretty big files, and
> multiple times (sort of like, install xorg and related packages,
> wait.... configure, install alsa/sound related packages, wait...
> configure)
>
>   
The downloading big packages step isn't any better with Ubuntu, you just
get to wait until after the installation is over and then install a huge
number of updates -- a problem that would be much worse if Ubuntu ever
updated anything.