Examples could be things like specific configuration defaults or general decision-making in leadership.

What would you change?

  • WbrJr@lemmy.ml
    0·
    9 months ago

    Unpopular take: A more complex installer that lets me choose what I want to use:

    • what de?
    • what theme of de?
    • what package manager?
    • all the video codecs or minimal?
    • what office programs?
    • graphics card? Nvidia or AMD?
    • developer pack? (Python, java, some other stuff, vscode/codium)
    • graphics suite (Krita, incscape, gimp)
    • KDE connect, syncthing?
    • Firefox or chromium?
    • cloud connections? (OneDrive, Google drive, nextcloud?)

    I don’t know what else could be interesting, but I think that would take away the annoying “what distro to I want” and would make Linux more like “I like gnome, everything installed, I’m a developer” or “KDE plasma, graphics and office, the rest inwant to install myself”

    Maybe I totally don’t understand what distros are, but isn’t all the same, just some differen configurations?

      • cyanarchy@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
        0·
        9 months ago

        I haven’t used any of the arch install scripts but they seem to have regular problems. Doing it the usual way is a proper way to roll your own but it doesn’t give you options. You have to know what you want, or you have to know where to find out what exists.

        The guided installer is going to be important to a type of person we’re going to see more and more of: power users that know what they want to do, but for whom the Linux ecosystem is a foreign and fractous entity what uses entirely unfamiliar nomenclature.