4 ms·
Lets not customize it then. What OS vendors should do is give as bare bone version of SO - kernel + package manager. We can take it from there with scripts. Wi
by majkinetor 5y ago
Lets not customize it then.
What OS vendors should do is give as bare bone version of SO - kernel + package manager. We can take it from there with scripts. With simple strategy to keep those scripts online like vscode keeps your settings would be definite solution but even without it you are one git clone away from your repo that contains all customizations. We could have option in Windows to export system settings as PowerShell script.
Its really not that hard, its just that nobody relevant wants to do it.
Microsoft, if you are listening, I would even do it for free (because ultimately it would save me time). Just gimme jurisdiction/authority and we can have that.
- mrozbarry 5y agoThe thing you are proposing sounds like absolute customization, unless I horribly misunderstand. "Take it from there with scripts" means not only is it fully customized, but you don't even have a trusted vendor to provide the scripts, which sounds like a nightmare to me.
- majkinetor 5y agoYou create customization scripts or take parts of system behavior from some trusted repository. Customization is not about "trusted vendors", its about you.
- mrozbarry 5y agoI guess my confusion is your initial statement "Lets not customize it then" followed by you proposing fully customized installs, and I'm not sure if I missed your point. I only brought up trusted vendors because it seemed that you also want repositories of customization scripts, and I don't disagree, but it shifts the trust from the people making your operating system to you reviewing a bunch of scripts to get the system you want. I'm making a point that people don't want that at all. That will absolutely cause analysis paralysis, there would be too many possibilities, and it would continue this idea that Linux is hard and elitist when it really shouldn't have to be that way.