<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=windows-1252"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
<br>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">Am 11.02.2015 um 15:22 schrieb Pasi
Lallinaho:<br>
</div>
<blockquote cite="mid:54DB65BC.7050803@shimmerproject.org"
type="cite">
<meta content="text/html; charset=windows-1252"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">While the media size is one of the
concerns, it's not the only one.<br>
<br>
Download times are an argument for keeping as small as possible;
the smaller our ISOs are, the less time they take to download.
Of course, if something is considered essential, then it can be
added, but the starting point should be to not include anything
that isn't essential.<br>
<br>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
Well, basicly you're right of course. But if i'm looking to europe,
the last defined internet connection bandwith at home by the
european commission was 4 mbit. This was somewhere 2006. 2014 the
european commission upgraded the target size to 30mbit(!) for a
average internet connection at home.<br>
I think we don't need to talk bandwith in north america or for
example japan. Well, about africa, i have to admit, i have no
sizing ideas.<br>
<br>
What i'm trying to say is, that is internet bandwith is growing very
fast and we're at a point, where we should looking forward and no
longer backward. Yes, you'll find special cases with a small
internet connection always, but the most of them (>90%) shouldn't
have a big problem if the iso size up to 2 GB.<br>
<br>
Yes, i'm voting for a "somewhat" below 2 GB iso size. <br>
<br>
<br>
Regards<br>
Daniel<br>
<br>
</body>
</html>