Barry, an idea for the bootup screen

[BarryK]

Code: Select all

[ -r /etc/profile.local ] && . /etc/profile.local 

GuestToo,
Yes, okay, I'll put that into the upcoming 1.0.5alpha2 release.

[saintlangton]

One of the Puppy mission statement is "just works"

Now a big part of "just works" is the perception that it is just working. If it looks as if it is not working or doing stuff associated with not working (putting text on the screen or displaying a primitive boot) then this sets up an expectation in the mind. I agree with BladeH that there are more important issues from a developers viewpoint but from an end users . . . first impressions are also very important.

She looks nice = she is nice

Paws up all those who feel it is time people based things on merit? (in your dreams . . .)

- Oh a Puppy - how cute - It must be a cute Linux

How about a "poor mans" bootsplash? Simply change the background colour from black to say white (as per the "puppy head" image screen) and have the text set the same colour.

Hey presto! No 'disturbing' lines of code, microscopic bloat, no reduction in speed, everybody happy? Probably best to add a verbose option like the options already presented when booting from cd, it'd just need to change the colour of the text.

It may be an idea to put the odd bit of ASCII in a different colour just to show that something is still happening (The one good thing a noob will get from the lines of code is that something is happening) These lines could just be the occasional "..." or prehaps something a little decriptive like "Recognising Hardware", "Starting Puppy Linux" for each stage of the boot? These lines would just be part of the script that slides up the screen but the rest of it would be invisible as it is the same colour.

Personally I think this would look quite "solid" and confidence inspiring.

What do you people think?

Chris

[Guest]

As far as I know the only way to remove the kernel messages would be to remove all the printk statements from the source code...hahahahahaha

As for the rest it's simply the way the bootscripts are designed.....

Anyway it's only 30 seconds or so of text....does it hurt you ? does it make you feel inadequate ? Does it make you less of something ? Does Puppy work ?

[Guest]

I propose a splash screen that stays on the screen for 10 minutes then at the end of that period decides whether to continue booting, just hang or reboot with no warning. Then if we do boot we could have the option, well not really an option, of either running with or without the BSOD. Then everytime a simple change is made we could be forced to go through the same procedure over again.
And how about 1.2gig null file in ram (swap) to make sure you can't run(?) more than one application at a time.
And how about a kernel level virii interface\API to make life easier for script kiddies ?
And then everytime you finally manage to connect to the internet 4.234 gig of patches are required to be downloaded, but after every patch is downloaded and installed you are required to reboot and by the time you finally get back online that particular patch has been superseded.

[Pizzasgood]

Huh. I must really be tired. I read that post and thought you were serious until I got to the patches part. Maybe I should go to bed.....

Nah. I'll just turn up the radio...

Personally, I like the text. I'm weird like that. I grew up on Windows 95 and 98, so I'm used to seeing pointless babble. I actually associate splash-screens with the five minutes following the text, waiting for the piece of junk to load, with no indication of whether it's still going or froze up. The text looks cool and techo-ish. Like it's a computer instead of a tv. Especially since linux can have colored text instead of just grey. I like seeing messages like
doing this..........................Success!
doing that..........................Success!
doing the other..........................FAILURE!
Okay, so maybe I don't like that last part, but I do get a kick out of the messages sometimes. Like kernal panics, and when it gets "confused" and stuff. Windows never admits that it did something wrong or is unsure until it commits an illegal opperation and shuts down to hide from the authorities.

So, stick with the text is my opinion. (Seriously, I like the text. I was mocking it in good humor. Text is good. Just ask your teachers.)

May the text be with you!

[BarryK]

How about a "poor mans" bootsplash? Simply change the background colour from black to say white (as per the "puppy head" image screen) and have the text set the same colour.

Hey presto! No 'disturbing' lines of code, microscopic bloat, no reduction in speed, everybody happy? Probably best to add a verbose option like the options already presented when booting from cd, it'd just need to change the colour of the text.

It may be an idea to put the odd bit of ASCII in a different colour just to show that something is still happening (The one good thing a noob will get from the lines of code is that something is happening) These lines could just be the occasional "..." or prehaps something a little decriptive like "Recognising Hardware", "Starting Puppy Linux" for each stage of the boot? These lines would just be part of the script that slides up the screen but the rest of it would be invisible as it is the same colour.

Personally I think this would look quite "solid" and confidence inspiring.

What do you people think?

Chris

Chris,
That's very interesting.
Like pizzasgood, I prefer seeing the text.. but I imagine that I'm learning something by watching all the messages.

How do I make the background white?

or maybe I just make the text black...