Successful install

[HaroldK]

The install required the foreknowledge that you are supposed to install at least a 2.5 gig / partition and a 256 k swap (and understand what that means.) Those instructions still remain fuzzy due to the residual Unix-priests who never wrote an instruction lesson for real people. The installer is dumped to an Fdisk screen to figure out with no hints what is needed to format the disk for Linux. Luckily I had tried to install Debian from a Debian disk pack, Red Hat Linux and Mandrake on several machines, so I understood what was happening. The Unix-world programmers are still caught in the engineer world where verbose means give almost enough info to give a hint to look elsewhere for where the information might be.

I installed Knoppix/Debian to my 4 gig hard drive. The only hitch during install was the 'percent loaded' screen being partially overwritten by notices of the scsi being ignored, but I ignored that and the install completed. The install was the smoothest of any of them and actually the only way to get a good first-time install of the desktop on my new machines. Debian and Mandrake installed OK on an older 400 speed HP server, but would not install on my new faster machines due to the video drivers bringing up a quarter-screen on the monitor so I couldn't read or access the necessary screen buttons to finish installs.

I am very happy to see that Linux programmers are beginning to understand the attractiveness of the ease of Wiindows set-up. This 3.2 version is as good as the Windows 98 installer; but nowhere near the sophistication of the XP installs - yet. The result of the installation is a very attractive and functional desktop. It is a giant step up from hundreds of 2-letter commands on a blank screen that were 'powerful' - meaning dangerous and destructive with no warnings.

[fingers99]

Mind you, the install script is something of an afterthought, magnificent as it is. Knoppix is still pretty much -- I gather -- pointed at the run it from CD arena.

I just wonder if the HOWTOs could be included (maybe with some kind of easy to follow visual manual for cfdisk) on the CDs?

I'd add that, although I've installed and used lots of Linux distros, Knoppix is my favourite to date.

[rickenbacherus]

The install required the foreknowledge that you are supposed to install at least a 2.5 gig / partition and a 256 k swap (and understand what that means.) Those instructions still remain fuzzy due to the residual Unix-priests who never wrote an instruction lesson for real people.

It's complaints like this that make me wonder what people expect and why they don't just do a little reading first. Here are two links to documentation stating exactly what you claimed was not written:
1
2

They are both accessible from this site. In fact I'd like to point out that the second link is actually a sticky on the hdd install forum- the very same forum that you posted this very post in. How ironic is that?

The installer is dumped to an Fdisk screen to figure out with no hints what is needed to format the disk for Linux. Luckily I had tried to install Debian from a Debian disk pack, Red Hat Linux and Mandrake on several machines, so I understood what was happening. The Unix-world programmers are still caught in the engineer world where verbose means give almost enough info to give a hint to look elsewhere for where the information might be.

How about instead of bitching you propose a solution, a suggestion, a way that it would be easier for you to get Knoppix installed. There is an 'Ideas' forum as well.

Did you know that you are welcome to add whatever you like to the wiki? That's right- it's created by the users of Knoppix for users of Knoppix.

[fingers99]

I wasn't all that sure how to take it.

I have been doing some thinking lately about exactly what would be required to simply give a Knoppix CD to someone who has never touched their bios, set up an ISP manually, or done anything other than use a pre-installed Windows set up and be confident in saying "get on with it!".

It's quite a mind binder

[Stephen]

I wasn't all that sure how to take it.

I have been doing some thinking lately about exactly what would be required to simply give a Knoppix CD to someone who has never touched their bios, set up an ISP manually, or done anything other than use a pre-installed Windows set up and be confident in saying "get on with it!".

It's quite a mind binder

Better yet give them and XP disk and a totally bare computer and see if they can come with a working system.

[garyng]

I wasn't all that sure how to take it.

I have been doing some thinking lately about exactly what would be required to simply give a Knoppix CD to someone who has never touched their bios, set up an ISP manually, or done anything other than use a pre-installed Windows set up and be confident in saying "get on with it!".

It's quite a mind binder

Better yet give them and XP disk and a totally bare computer and see if they can come with a working system.

I have done that numerous times. The only thing that may initimate a user for a completely new XP installation would be the partition creation which is also handled nicely.

XP and Linux installation is like day and night. Linux advocate may not like it but Microsoft has spent a lot of money and effort in this area(. I am wondering if they beat even Apple.

[Stephen]

XP and Linux installation is like day and night. Linux advocate may not like it but Microsoft has spent a lot of money and effort in this area(. I am wondering if they beat even Apple.

I must say that I have never had the pleasure of the XP install I basing my opinion on what I had read from Joe Barr and to me it seemed like the same old thing to me and I still don't think some clueless noob to computers could manage it.

[garyng]

XP and Linux installation is like day and night. Linux advocate may not like it but Microsoft has spent a lot of money and effort in this area(. I am wondering if they beat even Apple.

I must say that I have never had the pleasure of the XP install I basing my opinion on what I had read from Joe Barr and to me it seemed like the same old thing to me and I still don't think some clueless noob to computers could manage it.

That article is IMO a bit bias against XP, or least give people the wrong impression, if we are comparing how easy it is to install a brand new OS on a brand new machine. First there is the network thing, it took me for quite some time to figure out how to setup networking under linux but I never encoutered a problem in XP(don't even need to do any setup, other than giving the needed username/passord for the ISP with ADSL connection). Then there is the time, while the actual time taken to 'update' or patch an XP system may be longer, it is pretty straight forward. On linux, even the highly praised apt-get is still very confusing. But that is just only the beginning. There is a lot of other tasks that go after the initial setup which XP leave linux far behind(because of its market dominance).

I plug a printer to the parallel port and the right driver is being installed and I can start printing. I would appreciate someone to tell me how the same can be done in linux. Have to remember printing is one of the major task.

The same goes for other things like my USB reader, I have to compile a new kernel for that under linux. Or my digital camera, or scanner.

All the mentioned task are IMO essential for today's PC operation. Even repair is relatively easy. I just reboot the XP CD and install again on an existing one. In linux, I need to search for rescue floppy etc.

I believe the catch phrase in that article is that "installing XP is boring", this to me means no surprise(bad side).

[fingers99]

It's quite a mind binder

Better yet give them and XP disk and a totally bare computer and see if they can come with a working system.

Maybe. But I'm not interested in people installing XP.

I think the Linux community is now at a point where it is attracting what someone tactfully called "clueless noobs". That's a good thing, I think. Point is, how do we make it more likely that their first install goes well and leads them with a working system.

I note that there's some discussion of this in the "bugs" section.

[Stephen]

That article is IMO a bit bias against XP, or least give people the wrong impression, if we are comparing how easy it is to install a brand new OS on a brand new machine.

Joe Barr is IMHO one of the better wirters out there and always presents a fair description of the facts at hand.

First there is the network thing, it took me for quite some time to figure out how to setup networking under linux but I never encoutered a problem in XP(don't even need to do any setup, other than giving the needed username/passord for the ISP with ADSL connection).

Netcardconfig worked flawlessly for me either way I used it with dhcp or my static connections. With the PPPoE I can't say never used it but around here it is not necessary even though they tell you need it dhcp works fine for that also.

Then there is the time, while the actual time taken to 'update' or patch an XP system may be longer, it is pretty straight forward. On linux, even the highly praised apt-get is still very confusing. But that is just only the beginning. There is a lot of other tasks that go after the initial setup which XP leave linux far behind(because of its market dominance).

Apt-get is a bitch until you get a handle on how it works not for the noob in any way, shape or form.

I plug a printer to the parallel port and the right driver is being installed and I can start printing. I would appreciate someone to tell me how the same can be done in linux. Have to remember printing is one of the major task.

The procedure I went through las week after having made a printer by fixing two. Plug the printer in re-boot so that it recognized by the startup procedure go to the Control Center select Peripherals then printers select the add printer wizard choose the printer from the list presented and print the test page it was that hard.

The same goes for other things like my USB reader, I have to compile a new kernel for that under linux. Or my digital camera, or scanner.

Don't use USB devices so have no experience with them.

All the mentioned task are IMO essential for today's PC operation. Even repair is relatively easy. I just reboot the XP CD and install again on an existing one. In linux, I need to search for rescue floppy etc.

I believe the catch phrase in that article is that "installing XP is boring", this to me means no surprise(bad side).

As I stated above my eXPerience with the dark side install is zero and shall remain so and people who would just like to have them control their every move have the multitude of security problems and all the rest that goes with it are more than welcome to have at it, for those who actually want to learn about their computer welcome to LINUX.