Boot screen: Quiet or not?

[Steve Lamb]

Mario Vukelic wrote:
> At the very least it confuses here into thinking something is wrong even
> when it isn't. You may not have notice, but the raw boot messages are
> often pretty ambiguous vor non-technical users.

    And you admonished me to read your messages.  Lemme repeat it again, "It's
ok, just don't worry until you see the login prompt."  There, confusion over.

> 1) Log in via ssh and change it. That's how support should work
> 2) As I said in my original post, of course it should show messages when
> there is a need. If everything is alright, there is no need.

    Yes, should is not will.  Third base!

> Please try to read my posts before replying to them, it gets annoying
> having to repeat that of course it should show messages when there is a
> need.

    Yes, should is not will.  Third base!

> No, I hope not. We should err on the side of the Mac and improve on
> that.  Slackware is a download away if yo want it.

    Why not?  Even though computers are Binary that doesn't mean distributions
are.  Let me break out the handy ASCII graphics.

Slackware [                              /    ] Windows
                                    Ubuntu

    See, we could edge away from Windows just a tad and not go into full tilt
Slackware.  It's ok, deeep breaths, deeeep breaths.

>> Trust me, Ubuntu is in no danger of drifting into Slackwaredom
>> just because of 30s of scroll during a critical portion of the machine's
>> operation.

> It's not critical when everything is fine.

    Except the one time it is not which kinda can't be predicted.  If it
could, it wouldn't be, you know, critical?

> Of course it should show messages when there is a need.

    Yes, should is not will.  Third base!

>>     It isn't a UI!  It is important diagnostic messages! 

> Which are delivered to the user by a user interface, the screen. And
> they are only important if anything goes wrong.

   Answered here.  VVVVVVVVV  Please take the time to read and not just fire
off not-so-witty remarks that have already been addressed.

>>  The UI is what comes
>> after the phrase "Username: "

> You have a too narrow notion of UI. If, for example, a new user cannot
> get the Ubuntu installer to boot because e is incapable of changing the
> boot sequence, what is this? It's a UI failure.

    I think that you're the one with too narrow a definition.  You think that
UI is used only by newbies and has no bearing outside of that definition.

>>  So how, exactly, does telling them to reboot the machines just so you can
>> attempt to get at the error messages that should be present in the first place
>> *good* diagnostic design?  It's not.

> Of course it should show messages when there is a need.

    Yes, should is not will.  THIRD BASE!

    I forget, are you Abbott or Costello?