
Improving the Fedora boot experience - DanBC
http://blog.linuxgrrl.com/2013/03/12/improving-the-fedora-boot-experience/
======
klrr
What I would want is some way to start X before even the tty. For example; on
Ubuntu when you boot up you can actually see the tty and a little bit of the
init scripts' output. This feels quite "cheap" in my honest opinion. I would
much rather see a proper Ubuntu logo and then a smooth transition to the X
login screen.

~~~
sgerrand
What you are seeing/referencing is the output of commands during earlier
runlevels; the X server won't start until runlevel 5 (number selected off the
top of my head). That said, it'd be good to give users of mainstream Linux
distributions like Ubuntu the option to suppress output from the boot scripts.

Year of Linux on the desktop, here we come!

~~~
jlgreco
> _That said, it'd be good to give users of mainstream Linux distributions
> like Ubuntu the option to suppress output from the boot scripts._

Haven't major distros been doing this for years? I only see the output if I
press escape, and pressing escape again suppresses it. Otherwise I just see a
progress bar/animation.

------
qb45
It's funny how they discuss cosmetics when there are hordes of driver bugs all
over the place.

I seems that RH copies Canonical's idea to make something looking "good" and
sell it to fans of eye candy who happen to own machines unaffected by bugs.

~~~
hyperpape
Please, stop talking about eye candy if you don't have a deep understanding of
UI design.

The most important aspects of UI are about presenting information in a way
that is comprehensible. Flashing error messages on screen for less than a
second is confusing--either the information is important and needs to be
visible for longer, or it should be relegated to a log file somewhere.

Upthread, someone said that showing all the output of the init scripts in a
tty feels cheap. I agree that it feels cheap--and it feels cheap because it
suggest something about the computer. Older OSes spent a lot of time
displaying initialization script outputs to the screen because that you had to
know about it. At any time, that shit might be broken, and you (or your
sysadmin) would have to reconfigure it. That's the wrong message to send to
your average Ubuntu user.

So if you thought that complaint or many of the complaints from the initial
article were about "eye candy" you were wrong.

~~~
qb45
I still believe that resources would be better spent on fixing stuff rather
than "sending a message" that it isn't broken.

And BTW, I'm a big fan of printing output of init scripts to console, provided
that it's nice and concise (as it used to be in most distros few years ago)
because it greatly aids debugging when (not _if_ ) stuff breaks. It's one of
the reasons I left Windows, actually.

~~~
hyperpape
I enabled it on my old Mac--because I am a huge freaking nerd. I never once
needed it, but it made me happy. However, I think it's definitely a bad
default. Make it easy to enable, and the people who need it will enable it.
But we should design and build for the normal case first.

