Hoary Bootsplash

[Michael Scottaline]

On Tue, 15 Feb 2005 06:28:02 -0500, lao_V <ulist at gs1.ubuntuforums.org> wrote:
> 
> Personally, I have no objection in security features and 'bugs' taking
> priority over any eye-candy enhancements (which may introduce some
> security issues in doing so).
> 
> However, these enhancements should not be ignored and left out. They
> should be implemented as soon as resourcefully possible.
=======================
I hadn't intended to generate so much [i]controversy[/i] with my
original question about why the boot splash would have so much value
;o)  But actually it doesn't appear there is significant disagreement
here; just shades of difference in terms of how significant the boot
splash might be.  I just didn't see it as important in that it doesn't
take ubuntu (or most modern distros) that long to boot and I don 't
usually sit staring at my fedora splash screen when I use that laptop.
 I pretty much ignore it.  I'm not opposed to eye-candy; I run
enlightenment on my ubuntu box and run some nice backgrounds.  I'm
certainly not opposed to gui.  But gui serves an actual purpose. 
Click an icon or menu item and something launches (as opposed to have
to type a command at cli).  The the boot splash's *only* function
would appear to be appearance.  Again, I have no objection; I'm not
urging ubuntu NOT to go with a boot splash.  And yes, freedon to use
or not use it is fine.  I originally asked because I just didn't place
a high priority on it.
I've enjoyed all of the civil input with regard to my original question.
Peace,
Mike
-- 
"I don't know how World War III will be fought, but I do know World 
War IV will be fought with sticks and stones" 
- Albert Einstein