Re: Installation

Duane Hill wrote:
> Well, thank you for a more courteous response than my ill tempered,
> original post.
> 
> And my apologies to the mailing list, I did not catch that it would be
> broadcast. 

Which still leaves the purpose of your message unclear.

> My original intent was to have the most secure OS available. I have
> installed Linux about 7 or 8 times, NetBSD three times, OpenBSD (to the
> kernel level) twice, and FreeBSD (to the kernel level) twice. It's been
> over a year since the last attempt, making my familiarity a bit stale.
> Mostly, I've gone back to 98SE because I could not get pppd to connect
> (due to the oddities of the ISP I had then), and partly because those
> versions of Gnome and KDE were clumsy. 

Windows 98SE?  yikes.
Sounds like a good reason to get a different ISP.

For the record, I also consider GNOME and KDE clumsy and pointless. 
'Course, I really don't think we are coming from the same point here. :)

> The written instructions for OpenBSD are the most irritating and hardest
> to follow as the relevant parts are deeply buried deeply in irrelevant
> clutter, 

Can we have some concrete examples of what "written instructions" you 
are looking at, and what you are considering "irrelevant clutter"?

As "most" and "hardest" are comparative words, I'd like examples of 
what you are considering GOOD documentation, as well.

Without concrete examples, your message has no constructive use.

Keep in mind, you are trying to install on ONE machine (yours) for ONE 
application (yours).  The manuals and FAQ cater to people using 
something like 17 /different platforms/, for unknown numbers of 
potential applications.  What is "irrelevant clutter" to you is likely 
critical information for someone else.

 > and I include Lucas' "Absolute OpenBSD".

which we don't have anything directly to do with.

> This irrelevant
> clutter is reducing recruitment of OpenBSD users, reducing the number of
> users.  

Interestingly, we get a lot of very positive comments about OpenBSD's 
documentation.  In fact, I don't recall having ever received a message 
similar to yours, contending our documetation is the "most irritating" 
and "hardest to follow".  Heck, the attitude is what got me interested 
in OpenBSD in the first place, but the documentation is what sold me 
and kept me.  I accomplished more with OpenBSD in three days than I 
did with Linux over many years.

I'm very happy to know we can't please everyone, no point in even 
trying.  However, I'm not beyond saying that someone out there can do 
better, so let's see it.  Teach me something.  Show me what YOU think 
is well done documenation, maybe I can learn something to improve our 
documentation.

> Such artificial barriers usually doom groups to extinction. OpenBSD is
> not likely to survive Theo. 

You seem to think OpenBSD is in a popularity contest.  It isn't.  We 
know full well that MOST people will eagerly trade away quality for 
features, learning something new for "ease of use", and closed systems 
for freedom.  As long as we go for quality, learning and freedom, we 
will be a specialty system, not a mass-market system.


Think of going to buy a high-performance sports car.  To sit in the 
thing, you find you have to fold yourself in to uncomfortable 
positions to fit in the thing, the seat is hard and holds you firmly 
in one position.  The five-point harness holds you in ways you aren't 
used to.  The steering is very tight, and to do a tight corner 
requires both hands on the wheel and a bit of muscle, the clutch is 
heavy, the stick shift is...OHMYGOD! Stick shift?  You gotta SHIFT the 
thing yourself, it doesn't do it for you!  Forget talking on the cell 
phone or drinking coffee while driving this thing!  Not that you could 
hear anyone over the sound of the engine or the wind blowing on you 
with the top down.  You know, maybe this isn't the kind of car you are 
looking for after all.

Me?  Gimme!!  That's what I like...

Nick.