435
votes
|
|
489
1
54
|
|
|
|
|
0
votes
|
|
0
0
0
|
|
|
|
|
|
Attachments
No attachments.
Duplicates
Comments
|
|
And also a dupe of some older ideas try to search ideas from number 1 to 150 something...
But yes I agree....
+1
|
|
|
A more appealing startup splash screen would be nice.
However, to me, I think speed and stability should be a priority over pretty.
|
|
|
I know my two ideas may seem a bit dupe:y, but my intention was to raise two different albeit related ideas:
1. Better transitioning between boot splash screens, shut down screens etc -> http://brainstorm.ubuntu.com/idea/9454/
2. Prettier splash screens (this idea).
|
|
Hawke
wrote on the 6 Jun 08 at 20:33
|
|
|
Umm, the current ubuntu startup screen is more like XP/Server 2003 than like windows 95.
I for one would relish a return to the late-90s mac/BeOS-style boot screen with icons for each subsystem as it's coming up.
|
|
|
It follows the exact same ugly pattern that was pioneered by windows95, which is a logo and an abstract progress bar underneath it.
Minimalism is beautiful. I think Apple has got it right in the newer OSX versions where all you see is a gray screen (osx themed) with the apple on it, and a small animation under it that lets you know the machine is still working.
Progress bars are pointless because they never truly let you know how much longer it will take before its ready.
And an abundance of information like you suggest might tickle the fancy of people who are actually interested in what's going on during the boot process, but the majority of people aren't, and should not need to see it.
|
|
Hawke
wrote on the 9 Jun 08 at 16:14
|
|
|
@maltepalte: Good point about the lack of information provided by the progress bar. The progress bar is mostly useful to show that "something is happening", rather than show actual progress (Win95 reflected this, while XP uses their current "indeterminate" progress bar). Ubuntu's shows actual progress through the boot process, but doesn't really reflect the actual time required for each subsystem to start up. Perhaps bootchart could be used to improve the accuracy of a progress bar, by measuring the proportional time required for each subsystem. Or perhaps that's just pointless wankery and a waste of computing resources that could be put to better use elsewhere (and will be inaccurate anyway since some subsystems are rather variable in their startup speed)
Anyone else think that a series of icons indicating the current starting-up subsystem would be a good idea?
|
|
twright
wrote on the 16 Jun 08 at 01:33
|
|
|
splashy would allow more colours in the splash screen
opensuse has an amazing spashscreen
|
|
|
-1
i really like it's simplicity & functionality
|
|
|
-1
i really like it's simplicity & functionality
|
|
|
I think the system icos idea is pretty good, would help those who need to know what's really happenning and for those who didn't care, well, it wouldn't hurt them
I think this is what mandriva did some releases ago.
Plus, if there was some startup problem (freezes and the like) this would help do some research or provide some info in case it was needed
+1
|
|
|
On older machines, or displays that don't support today's high-resolutions, a high res Usplash screen will have bits cut off it where it goes beyond the reaches of the display. E.g. on a monitor in 640x480 mode (which, I might add, the LiveCD sometimes runs at before getting to the GDM and logging in), a Usplash of 1280x1024 size (or greater) would have about half the picture missing. That would look infinitely less polished and professional than the current one, however ugly you think it may be.
And remember that magic "first impressions made in 7 seconds" rule: it may not be the full desktop, but the Usplash is all part of making that first impression. If it looks botched and half the picture is missing, that's marks off. If it looks a little ugly, that's fewer marks off.
Therefore, to use a high-res Usplash on the LiveCD would be a bad idea.
And anyway, you say you like the OS X splash with the minimalistic Apple logo and a progress bar. Erm, that sounds a lot like what we've got: a (fairly) minimalistic Ubuntu logo and a progress bar. What's the big difference?
If you don't like it, there's a million different Usplash screens to choose from on gnome-look.org and the like. Now if only it were simpler to install them... that would be an idea I'd give +1 to...
PS I don't know who marked your other similar idea as a dupe, because it isn't really, but I agree with it. I hate when the network manager screws up and I get the normal shutdown screen, then it flickers to about 20 seconds worth of angry monochrome messages, then it flickers back to the normal shutdown screen.
|
Post your comment
|
