Written by slsolaris the 7 Jul 08 at 12:36.
Category: System.
Related project:
Nothing/Others.
Status: New
Rationale
ubuntu must have startUp-manager by default to change its theme whenever we want and add a new one, but never replace the actual one look (black screen, white letter), it is neat and i like it, it does what it have to do!!!
i am not agree with this idea: http://brainstorm.ubuntu.com/idea/21/ because for that we got startUp-manager...
HELLO!! what else do you need, if some people want to change the look of its grub go and change it with this tool, but by default leave it as it is!!!
Besides for the upcoming jaunty jackalope it must have like a menu (i am talking about grub) for example u know that always that ubuntu is moving to a new version we got a long list with all kernels, so it is a good ides to put them in a menu.....
for example:
ubuntu kernels->
ubuntu safe mode
last successful boot
memtest86
windows xp
It has much better graphical capabilities (there is a libvideo folder too, which suggests that it will support animations), and fixes many design issues with Grub1.
The introduction of Grub2 would provide us with a bootloader which no proprietary OS can compete with currently, provide us with something that is completely cross platform, and less vulnerable to errors.
I fully disagree. The bootloader is the first impression people have of Linux. People who value speed over user-friendliness are using the wrong distro.
It should look nice, should not scare the user by looking "low-level", and should not be cluttered with confusing things like "kernel 2.6.24-16-generic". It should just list "Ubuntu", "Windows" and any other things you might have installed, with the more advanced things (recovery console, older kernels, mem test) hidden behind a divider.
Therefore we really need Grub2. Lets not invest more time to something which will not be needed anymore once we have Grub2 which solves a bunch of other issues too. Functionality is more important than the look.