Re: Create your own customised GNOME liveCD

[Simos Xenitellis <simos74 gmx net>]

Claus Schwarm wrote:

> On Mon, 25 Jul 2005 09:14:47 -0400
> Luis Villa <luis villa gmail com> wrote:
>
>  
>
> > things I think in the end I disagree with gnoppix about:
> > * naming; I want it called simply the GNOME LiveCD. No one outside a
> > core group of geeks knows what knoppix is, and so calling it gnoppix
> > is (1) marketing to the wrong group and (2) confusing to newbies.
> > * installation: as already pointed out
> >
> >    
>
> Knoppix is around for two or three years, was discussed and
> presented in a large number of journals, and is  -- for a Linux
> distribution -- rather well known.
>
> Beginners or infrequent computer users are unlikely to test a LiveCD -
> they need to know what an operating system is, that there are more
> choices than Microsoft, and maybe how to change their BIOS settings to
> make booting from a CD work.
>
> A liveCD is thus nice for advanced users. They probably heard the word
> 'Knoppix' more often that they heard the word 'GNOME'.
>
> This is no argument for or against any of these names but a reminder
> that the above argument doesn't make sense. We should get away from the
> 'either newbie or geek' distinction -- there are quite a lot of advanced
> users out there.
>  
I cannot understand your point.

There is a general perception that a LiveCD is the least intrusive way 
for a new user to familiarise him/herself
with a new operating system. Other options would be to give away 
preinstalled computers (expensive), or
ask them to install (intrusive, cannot back out). Do you have any 
figures that shows the LiveCDs do not work
well with newbies?
Indeed the newbie has to make sure the computer boots from CDROM, but 
this is a requirement we have to
live with. When you buy a new computer, you get a rescue CD that you are 
required to boot with if you make
a mess.
Although I do not have figures to support my case (LiveCDs are the least 
possible means to show a new user
a new software offering), I feel that they are good.

What Luis asks about rebranding the LiveCDs as "GNOME LiveCD" is simply 
that; rebrand it to appear
as a product offering from GNOME, to showcase GNOME. In technical terms 
it means to make a parameter
for the name of the LiveCD construction toolkit, so perhaps both GNOME 
and others can make their own
branded offerings.

Maybe I am wrong, my view is that we (GNOME Marketing) want to get a 
LiveCD ISO image out to the masses
that support both English and other languages. We (GNOME Marketing) are 
flexible with how it is done, we would
like it done in a comfortable way.
My views on:
a. gnoppix.org, I have the impression they have been absorbed into the 
Ubuntu LiveCD project. Is that true?
They make no announcements that I can see (GNOME lists, linuxtoday.org, 
etc), so one would assume they are
defunct. I think the lead developer is working for Ubuntu now. They do 
not market well, if they are still in the market.
b. GNOME e.V: Just read about their efforts. I did not see any other 
announcement of their effort. It would be good
guys to publicise the project. It looks very interesting what you are 
doing with the Web-interface to make multiple custom
LiveCDs. If multilingual is your goal, you could parameterise boot 
screens (text), boot logo (SVG) so that the text goes
into .po files, and use a Web translation mechanism (Pootle or simply 
GNOME i18n) to have translations in many languages.
Anyway, this would be the ideal situation for GNOME.
Then, you can autogenerate once and distribute.

See, I speak as if I am representing GNOME Marketing...

Simos
That's Greek to me.