In article <0fmnk.7490$kh2.4217@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
Linonut <linonut@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >> It takes a significant multiple of 25 minutes to do a clean install of
> >> Windows XP or Windows Vista.
> >
> > Lie.
>
> Not a lie. Merely misleading, in the same sense that your reposting of
> problem-threads is misleading.
>
> You just want the XP screen to come up on a fast machine, and don't care
> if you have networking or full video support? Then you are correct.
>
> You want more, though, and you don't have an OEM disk? Then Roy is
> correct.
I'd take "significant multiple" to be at least 2x, or 3x, or some other
integer multiple > 1. So were are talking at least 50 minutes. I don't
think Roy is correct if that is the case.
However, a more interesting question is whether or not Ubunutu
installing faster is actually a good advocacy point or not. Install is
something people want to do *once*. However, many people get their
Windows systems so messed up that they reinstall on occasion. At first,
then, you might think that faster install would be a selling point, so
it seems like a good advocacy point.
However, it's also going to make people think that reinstalling is
something that they will have to do on Linux, just like they now do on
Windows. That is going to mislead people, and is not good advocacy.
Speaking of install times, Win95 was interesting. My copy of Win95 was
an upgrade. To install it, I had to install DOS, with CD-ROM support,
first, then run the Win95 setup program from DOS. During the install,
it would look on my system for proof that I had an eligible product.
For convenience, I burned a copy of the Win95 upgrade CD, that included
a DOS boot floppy image, with a batch file that would setup DOS on my
hard disk, and install CD-ROM support, and also install the minimal
files necessary from my Windows 3.x disk to satisfy the Win95 upgrade.
Result: a single CD that had everything I needed to install Windows 95.
The first time I tried it, I thought I must have done something wrong,
because when it got to the most time consuming part--the part where it
says it is copying files and takes something like 30 minutes, it zoomed
through, in about 5 minutes! To my surprise, it really was copying that
fast!
Apparently, the files on the original CD were laid out in an order that
didn't match the order the installer accessed them, so there was a lot
of seeking on the CD. My CD (mastered on Linux) apparently laid the
files out in an order that was much closer to optimal, so the copy raced
through with little extra seeking.
--
--Tim Smith
|
|
