Making Linux Booting Pretty

LinuxNews.pl writes: "Remember why you compiled your framebuffer into kernel? Of course! Because of the fblogo -- great penguin image on startup :) Now you can update your fblogo and create a graphical startup, just like in Windows. There are few themes (one is for Debian!) Check out the whole story on Linuxnews.pl" You can get more info on the Linux Progress Page from their website -- that's not to say, of course, that streaming text isn't pretty in its own special way -- but eyecandy always counts for something. (Can anyone point to a good runs-under-Linux way to change the startup logo in the BIOS, as well, similar to this method that Windows users can use to update the "Energy Star" logo? We're well on our way to a hyper-custom boot process ...)

Comments

Why should this matter?

[Masem]

Who'd be rebooting their linux box often enough to require eye candy during start up time? :-)

Re:Why should this matter?

[mjh]

Consultants (like me) who tote their laptop around with them and advertise that they use Linux instead of Winders. Consultants who are going into companies trying to save those companies money by deploying linux where appropriate. This small bit of eye candy creates a huge amount of confidence for the client.

(Yes it's irrational. Welcome to consulting.)

The point is that making Linux attractive to my client gives me the oppurtunity to better meet their needs. When I do that, I get more work, and recommendataions.

Pretty is a good thing.

while everyone pisses and moans...

[scrytch]

...about the splash screen hiding the boot info, try emulating FreeBSD's behavior. Hit space while the splash screen is up, and there's your scrolly messages again. The selection of a splash screen is done in the bootloader too, controlled by a module the bootloader loads (the kernel is loaded the same way as any other module, at least interface-wise, it can even unload a kernel and use a different one).

--

Re:Foul heretics!

[Azog]

Actually, it wouldn't be that hard to do this, if you have a simple program that can send a wave file to your sound card.

Hmmm. If you have the common style of startup script directories with /etc/rc.d/init.d and /etc/rc.d/rc[0-6].d/ directories, then add a "initsound" script to /etc/rc.d/init.d that has something like:

#!/bin/sh
# "initsound"
# play a sound when entering each run level

# assume /bin/playwav is the program, and
# /etc/runlevel_sound[0-6].wav are the sound files.

/bin/playwav /etc/runlevel_sound$runlevel.wav

# end of file

Then in each /etc/rc.d/rc[0-6].d/ directory, add the appropriate symbolic link over to initsound:

S01initsound -> ../init.d/initsound

Something like that should do it. I haven't tested this though. It would be amusing to put in the Windows 2000 startup and shutdown sounds.


Torrey Hoffman (Azog)

Ease of graphical customization

[Bonker]

...is not something that can be ignored when trying to get one's grandma to install linux or another OSOS.

Remember that one of the points that Apple is selling more than anything else about OSX is its graphical 'beauty' (something like that at any rate.) Steve and Apple marketing truly expect that the graphical theme they've layered on top of their GUI and *nix OS will draw users. When I worked on a Mac at a certain design firm, one of the most used applications was Kaleidoscope. (If you didn't know, it's a set of extensions that allows for complete skinning of the Mac0S.) Windows 'Themes' were so important that Microsoft took them out of the 'Plus' packs and put them into the Main OS install for both Win9x and 200x. While themes are available for some of the different X GUI's, *compelete* one button customization is just not there yet. While it doesn't add any real usability, this will be a major step towards getting more mainline acceptance (and mainline apps) for Linux or any other OSOS

The masses have money.

[roystgnr]

Why is everyone so convinced that Linux has to be prettied up, promoted, and made palatable to the masses?

Because the masses have money. Companies like money. Companies that see the prospect of money in Linux on the desktop are more likely to publish Linux ports of their video games, write Linux drivers for their hardware, and offer Linux-compatible ISP services and online media.

I like Linux game, Linux drivers, and Linux compatibility. Any more questions?

There are many more reasons why even the most hardcore, non-gaming, free-software-only Linux user still benefits by "Linux for the masses", though. You may complain that Red Hat is aiming for a Linux distribution a 3 year old can use... but they're not taking away our Perl interpreters and ssh daemons to do it, and eventually that 3 year old may grow up and spend a little time playing around with the compiler himself.

The other thing that's "vital for desktop acceptance" is an office suite of the caliber of MS Office 2000, which isn't going to happen unless they decide to port it.

Of course it isn't. Free software developers could never produce any sort of useful desktop software on their own, certainly not any office programs. That stuff is just too complicated for a bunch of hackers. Why, where would they even start?

Out of sight, out of mind.

[kramer]

It's not just eyecandy. It's a vital step to desktop acceptance. I've installed linux for non techies on their machines. I showed them how to use it, shoewed them how it differend from windows, and what's the first thing I hear from them when it starts up? "Oh, I don't know if I can do this... look at all those lines scrolling by...."

Microsoft learned a long time ago that 99% of their users don't understand or care about those lines scrolling by, and in fact it intimidates them. It is generally not considered a good idea to intimidate your users. It just makes them not want to use your system.

Sure, in the perfect world nobody would be intimidated, and everybody would understand implicity that they really don't need to pay attention to most of those messages in most cases. But the world's no perfect, and neither are the people in it.

Re:Appealing for the masses

[fizban]

Actually, making OSes appealing to the masses is not necessarily about just "prettying up" things. It's about making the OS transparent to the user.

I don't need to know the startup sequence my car goes through when I turn the key in the ignition. I just turn the key, the engine starts and I drive away.

This is the type of thing we should be striving for with computers. You turn the key, the machine starts and you use it. This whole logo thing hiding the boot messages at startup is not what we should be aiming for, though. We shouldn't get excited about it. But, neither should we want all those startup messages everytime we boot. What we should be striving for is a boot process that just does what it's supposed to - boot the computer and get the user to a state of working usefulness. If there are problems, you can flip a switch that provides diagnostics to send to someone (like taking the car to the shop), or the OS could be smart enough to even handle the error checking itself and fix any problems on its own, similar to the disc error checking that occurs if you shut down your computer "improperly."

The idea behind the the logo mentality is what matters here. Creating computer systems that are "user friendly" is the goal, and note that "user friendly" is not synonymous with "pretty" - it's means creating a tool that the user can use without caring what's going on inside.

--

Foul heretics!

[hawk]

It's not just unnecessary, it's *evil*.

For crying out loud. First they took away my toggle switches, and then the whole front panel.

Then the machines started taking it upon themselves to boot a DOS or TOS without even a "by your leave," let alone a keyboard command from the monitor.

Then they took the monitor.

NOw you want to take my boot sequence from me?

evil, evil, evil.

The *only* change that should happen in the current *nix boot sequences is to ad Majel Barrret's voice announcing key checkpoints , such as "going multiuser" and daemon initialization . . . :)

hawk, crankier than usual