5 ms·

Just whiny, but why does Ubuntu (or most distros) not give any idea of minimum/average disk required for install in their system requirements area? I know, I c

by mwexler 17y ago

Just whiny, but why does Ubuntu (or most distros) not give any idea of minimum/average disk required for install in their system requirements area? I know, I can customize the install so as to reduce or increase space requirements, but even a suggestion that "a straight default install requires around 2gb of space for programs, and 1gb for swap" would be helpful.

bretthoerner 17y ago
I can't answer the general question, but for what it's worth a 32-bit desktop install took up about 2.5G on disk.
- deleted 17y ago
  [deleted]
mseebach 17y ago
If you're a geek and need to ask, it's probably too large (if you worry about hard-disk space, you're probably trying to install it on something obscenely old. Ubuntu isn't for that.). If you're not a geek, it'll fit (any consumer computer going over the counter for the past 6-7 years, probably more, has at least a 20 GB drive in it. Most likely you'll have 100+ GB).
- mikeyur 17y ago
  "you're probably trying to install it on something obscenely old" Or something new, like an SSD on which you're attempting to dual/triple boot.
  - mseebach 17y ago
    Yeah, well, good point. My point was that a userfriendly distribution shouldn't present technical information that isn't absolutely vital. And it's really easy to find, by the way: http://www.google.com/search?q=ubuntu+requirements http://www.google.com/search?q=ubuntu+requirements
    - natrius 17y ago
      Disk space requirements aren't obscure technical information. Providing it wouldn't confuse anyone, especially not anyone adept enough to install an operating system. It should be provided.
      - Tuna-Fish 17y ago
        > Providing it wouldn't confuse anyone You fail at UI. Any and all information always adds some cognitive load and confuses the user. Every time you think you should show the user something, you must figure out a very convincing reason why you should not just leave it out. There clearly isn't one for majority of users who are going to install ubuntu, and for the rest, googling for two easy words isn't going to be too much of trouble.
        natrius 17y ago
        Disk space is required to install the OS. The alternative is letting the user download the .iso, burn it, then try to install only to have the installer complain about not having enough space. That is failing at UI. The additional cognitive load of reading a disk space requirement is negligible, especially compared to what someone who needed that information has to go through without it. You haven't even considered the possibility that a user might not think about how much space they have until they come across the requirement. Not only are you wrong, but "You fail at UI" is a particularly abrasive way to be wrong.
        Tuna-Fish 17y ago
        > Not only are you wrong I might well be wrong about whether it's worth it to show disk space or not. I have no problem admitting this, because I haven't done any studies about it. > but "You fail at UI" is a particularly abrasive way to be wrong. >The additional cognitive load of reading a disk space requirement is negligible Apparently I was too abrasive, or not abrasive enough. NO amount of cognitive load is negligible. Ever. When you design a dialog with two buttons that both have to be there, both of those buttons are creating a significant amount of cognitive load. Understanding this is largely why apple makes good UI's. You should never try to justify removing something from the UI -- you must instead always have very good reasons why NOT to remove something, and remove it by default if you can't find enough (not any). As I said, I have not made any studies of how users install ubuntu or what they expect, but as it's supposed to be installed as the os on the computer, in place of whatever that was before, and as there is no commonly available commodity hardware that it won't install on, I can easily see how there is no longer enough justification to show disk space requirements.
- deleted 17y ago
  [deleted]
windsurfer 17y ago
From http://www.ubuntu.com/products/whatisubuntu/desktop/features http://www.ubuntu.com/products/whatisubuntu/desktop/features : System requirements Ubuntu is available for PC, 64-Bit and Mac architectures. The Alternate installation CDs require at least 256 MB of RAM (the standard installation CD requires 384MB of RAM). Install requires at least 3 GB of disk space.
- mwexler 17y ago
  Hmm... I guess I never thought of Sys Req as "features". I would expect it in the release notes (not present) or on the download page (not present). Placing at the bottom of the "features" page is obfuscating, in my opinion, if it is placed nowhere else. But good of you to find it; I would never have thought to look at the Features page. Again, whiny of me. And even Canonical forgets it's there; now that you pointed it out, some searching reveals a similar page, http://www.ubuntu.com/products/whatisubuntu/desktopedition http://www.ubuntu.com/products/whatisubuntu/desktopedition, which says it requires 4 GB of space.

by mwexler 17y ago

bretthoerner 17y ago

I can't answer the general question, but for what it's worth a 32-bit desktop install took up about 2.5G on disk.

deleted 17y ago
[deleted]

mseebach 17y ago

If you're a geek and need to ask, it's probably too large (if you worry about hard-disk space, you're probably trying to install it on something obscenely old. Ubuntu isn't for that.). If you're not a geek, it'll fit (any consumer computer going over the counter for the past 6-7 years, probably more, has at least a 20 GB drive in it. Most likely you'll have 100+ GB).

mikeyur 17y ago
"you're probably trying to install it on something obscenely old" Or something new, like an SSD on which you're attempting to dual/triple boot.
- mseebach 17y ago
  Yeah, well, good point. My point was that a userfriendly distribution shouldn't present technical information that isn't absolutely vital. And it's really easy to find, by the way: http://www.google.com/search?q=ubuntu+requirements http://www.google.com/search?q=ubuntu+requirements
  - natrius 17y ago
    Disk space requirements aren't obscure technical information. Providing it wouldn't confuse anyone, especially not anyone adept enough to install an operating system. It should be provided.
    - Tuna-Fish 17y ago
      > Providing it wouldn't confuse anyone You fail at UI. Any and all information always adds some cognitive load and confuses the user. Every time you think you should show the user something, you must figure out a very convincing reason why you should not just leave it out. There clearly isn't one for majority of users who are going to install ubuntu, and for the rest, googling for two easy words isn't going to be too much of trouble.
      - natrius 17y ago
        Disk space is required to install the OS. The alternative is letting the user download the .iso, burn it, then try to install only to have the installer complain about not having enough space. That is failing at UI. The additional cognitive load of reading a disk space requirement is negligible, especially compared to what someone who needed that information has to go through without it. You haven't even considered the possibility that a user might not think about how much space they have until they come across the requirement. Not only are you wrong, but "You fail at UI" is a particularly abrasive way to be wrong.
        Tuna-Fish 17y ago
        > Not only are you wrong I might well be wrong about whether it's worth it to show disk space or not. I have no problem admitting this, because I haven't done any studies about it. > but "You fail at UI" is a particularly abrasive way to be wrong. >The additional cognitive load of reading a disk space requirement is negligible Apparently I was too abrasive, or not abrasive enough. NO amount of cognitive load is negligible. Ever. When you design a dialog with two buttons that both have to be there, both of those buttons are creating a significant amount of cognitive load. Understanding this is largely why apple makes good UI's. You should never try to justify removing something from the UI -- you must instead always have very good reasons why NOT to remove something, and remove it by default if you can't find enough (not any). As I said, I have not made any studies of how users install ubuntu or what they expect, but as it's supposed to be installed as the os on the computer, in place of whatever that was before, and as there is no commonly available commodity hardware that it won't install on, I can easily see how there is no longer enough justification to show disk space requirements.
deleted 17y ago
[deleted]

windsurfer 17y ago

From http://www.ubuntu.com/products/whatisubuntu/desktop/features http://www.ubuntu.com/products/whatisubuntu/desktop/features : System requirements Ubuntu is available for PC, 64-Bit and Mac architectures. The Alternate installation CDs require at least 256 MB of RAM (the standard installation CD requires 384MB of RAM). Install requires at least 3 GB of disk space.

mwexler 17y ago
Hmm... I guess I never thought of Sys Req as "features". I would expect it in the release notes (not present) or on the download page (not present). Placing at the bottom of the "features" page is obfuscating, in my opinion, if it is placed nowhere else. But good of you to find it; I would never have thought to look at the Features page. Again, whiny of me. And even Canonical forgets it's there; now that you pointed it out, some searching reveals a similar page, http://www.ubuntu.com/products/whatisubuntu/desktopedition http://www.ubuntu.com/products/whatisubuntu/desktopedition, which says it requires 4 GB of space.