Splash feature

[lucky13]

Splash screen isn't needed for beauty reasons but to prevent the misunderstandings boot messages inevitably create for unexperienced users.

Cut the hyperbole. I don't think it's "inevitable" that boot messages create misunderstandings for anyone. Certain users may be uncomfortable with them. That's their problem, not TinyCore's.

Shall TC welcome 95% of new visitors by informing them: 'Go away, TC is not made for you!'

Sure. And if TC won't do it, I will in simple terms: "You can't please everyone. Have a nice day and try something pre-configured, dumbed down, and that you can't control on your own because its developers have taken all such liberties for you."

One size does *not* fit all. Let's keep TinyCore tiny and leave it to developers who want to base their "we won't scare you with the details" distros on TinyCore to dress it all up as they see fit.

If there is the possibility to serve the needs of 10 x more people, just by offering some additional features - (you wouldn't loose anything) - why not offer these features?

First, don't tell me "bootsplash" is a feature because it serves no function and possesses no utility -- it only masks the boot process, which I think makes this an *anti*-feature.
 
Second, I don't think projects need to appeal to a wider user base to be "successful." Users who want such a system as TinyCore will be attracted to it regardless of whether they see how their hardware is detected and configured.

Third, I'm not opposed to making things easier for end users but I do think suggestions like yours really confuse "ease" for "aesthetic." Boot processes aren't scary, and the kind of user put off by seeing text scroll up are the same kind whose incessantly repetitive questions end up flooding forums and IRC and wherever they go instead of using Google to answer rudimentary questions. TinyCore has come a long way in the past year but it's probably still not the best starting point on a Linux learning curve for many users, particularly for inexperienced users who are so easily scared off. That's not snobbery, that's reality. And it's not with an intention to run people off but realization that some things aren't good for everyone no matter how you try to do them. Let the more fragile user spend time with something that doesn't require any hands-on configuration, let the strong use TinyCore.

Frankly, I don't see how enabling a bootsplash option will benefit sizable groups of users who'd be scared off without it. It seems this would only be of use to someone looking for an easy way out of remastering. I really don't think development should be focused on such trivialities as a splash option or anything else which is, at its heart, more about aesthetics than function -- style over substance.

[K_evin]

Frankly, I don't see

Dear lucky,
obviously you don't see anything, are probably up on the wrong side.

Filtering out any unnecessary information is the only way to handle knowledge in an age counting information by gigabytes.

Not only filtering out but also delivering just in time, only then when that piece of information is needed, that’s the future.

Delivering nothing if not needed, that’s the state of the art. Even you will have to learn these facts.


I would like to see boot messages in case there is a serious error.

In all the 99.9% other cases I want an image telling me that everything is all right.

Would be great if TC could offer such feature.

Kevin

[althalus]

Let's first off recognise that a splash image during bootup means:
 * Extra RAM used to display an image at such a low level of start up
 * More disk room to store that boot image (Sure, it may be almost negligable, but that is beside the point - Every release aims to get smaller, not larger)
And don't forget that it is a "Feature" which does not add any Functionality. Even if we DID agree that making the boot look friendlier is a "function", we must recognise that it is not a core function in getting a desktop loaded.

With this in mind, go read the core concepts of tiny core.

The way I see it, TC's job is not to pander to the whims of people who want things easy, pretty, or simple. TC's jobs is to pander to the esoteric whims of people who want something minimal, something they have complete control over. Changing that would mean changing TC's Core concepts, and I rather like the concepts TC is built around.

IMHO, TC is only going to appeal to people with at least a little bit of a hacker/DIY mentality. If your grandma or other non-technical relative happens to be using TC, then yourself or some other more technical relative has probably set it up - in which case you have access to all the tools to screw with the boot system all you like.

[JoXo009]

Let's first off recognise that a splash image during bootup means:
 * Extra RAM used to display an image at such a low level of start up
 * More disk room to store that boot image

Not at all. It's the option we are discussing on. The option means:
 * Null Extra RAM
 * Null storage room
TC wouldn't grow by a single byte when offering the option.

As with any other extension a grow would take place only after installing TC when using the option and downloading that extension.

And what TC's Core concept concerns I think Kevin is right. Being minimal as stipulated in these concept is the future and that means presenting information only if it's needed, presenting boot messages only if there are boot errors.

Taking core concepts seriously the option of switching off messages as long as there is no heavy error would be more than consequent to my opinion.

[^thehatsrule^]

Weren't some options discussed some time ago?  There's already a fb boot image, too.  Maybe try

Code: [Select]

vga=782 console=/dev/null... but this would suppress any passing errors as well.  But depending on the audience, that may not be an issue either (most likely boot would continue too).

Obviously, supporting something in the base require changes.  This may mean added things and complexity in our boot system.  However, I can't judge on this because I have never looked into the details of Splashy, etc.

Also, let's keep grandmothers out of this - "new users" etc. are fine.

i see an ascii cow running away from the rotating dash... sorry, can't turn the kid in me off

I like it

EDIT: As I have reiterated on IRC, bootloaders are out of scope - they are invoked before TC does.

[althalus]

Let's first off recognise that a splash image during bootup means:
 * Extra RAM used to display an image at such a low level of start up
 * More disk room to store that boot image

Not at all. It's the option we are discussing on. The option means:
 * Null Extra RAM
 * Null storage room
TC wouldn't grow by a single byte when offering the option.

As with any other extension a grow would take place only after installing TC when using the option and downloading that extension.

And what TC's Core concept concerns I think Kevin is right. Being minimal as stipulated in these concept is the future and that means presenting information only if it's needed, presenting boot messages only if there are boot errors.

Taking core concepts seriously the option of switching off messages as long as there is no heavy error would be more than consequent to my opinion.

Ah, I misunderstood. You want to make an extension that would hide boot messages? Hmm, I don't think that's feasible. By the time extensions are loaded, the boot process is already a fair way in.

[lucky13]

Frankly, I don't see how enabling a bootsplash option will benefit sizable groups of users who'd be scared off without it. It seems this would only be of use to someone looking for an easy way out of remastering. I really don't think development should be focused on such trivialities as a splash option or anything else which is, at its heart, more about aesthetics than function -- style over substance.

Dear lucky,
obviously

Kevin

Wanna play? Speaking of bad sides, welcome to mine. (expletives reserved due to TOS)

@althalus

Ah, I misunderstood. You want to make an extension that would hide boot messages?

Worse, a boot option to allow the use of such an extension -- which would require these fragile and skittish noobs to understand beforehand that they need to use a cheatcode AND to have first downloaded the splash extension or else they'll be scared off from the boot messages. And we already know how everyone bothers to RTFM. So this is one more hurdle for them to consider if they even figure out such an option/extension/whatever is avaiable.

On a scale of 1-10 for attracting new users, this is a zero. The thing that hampers TinyCore from global domination isn't "more boot messages than ubuntu."

On a scale of 1-10 of utility/feature, this is a zero. As I noted before, it does nothing except mask a normal process. While some users may be intimidated by such things, it's not a barrier to use or adoption.

@hats

Also, let's keep grandmothers out of this...

Agreed even  though our LUG meetings are dominated by the geriatric set.