Jump to content

- - - - -

nativeEx organization

  • Please log in to reply
5 replies to this topic

#1 pscEx


    Platinum Member

  • Team Reboot
  • 12707 posts
  • Location:Korschenbroich, Germany
  • Interests:What somebody else cannot do.
    European Union

Posted 08 January 2007 - 07:14 PM

In a different post Phox asked for some additional scripts to be included in nativeEX.

Here my opinion for public discussion:

I want to have the basic project (which is got from the download center) as small as possible. Just the scripts necessary to boot on a 'standard' system with IDE HD, no sound, no special graphic card, no USB, no ... but with network (Holger?)

Additional there is a repository offering all the different 'e' scripts.
Besides Apps etc. it also includes 'non-standard' drivers like SATA etc.

I think, Nuno can write an appendix to his download center tool to get files from this repository.
(@Nuno, if your time does not allow, I'll write a separate program to do this; perhaps with a DCU to be inculded in WB)


#2 phox


    Silver Member

  • .script developer
  • 764 posts

Posted 08 January 2007 - 07:41 PM

Principally I agree with you.
It is exactly what I have proposed (several times).

I just consider USB support for sticks, KB and mouse
and SATA HD (they are standard already) as part of
Basic package, including LAN, WLAN and Internet support.

#3 MedEvil


    Platinum Member

  • .script developer
  • 7771 posts

Posted 08 January 2007 - 10:40 PM

Peter if you wanna create a basic version for nativeEx, with just default drivers, i would include USB-massstorage as well, as there is a default driver for it.

If i would let anything out of a basic version, then it would be all the things that need specific drivers, like Sound, LAN, WLAN, SATA ....

The point i just don't get, is why everyone wants to create mini versions that have to be extended, instead of a fullfeatured version, where things can get deselected?

This aint the 80ies where people downloaded, using devices with ridiculous slow speeds.

Bandwidth is cheap, handwork is hard! :P

#4 TheHive


    Platinum Member

  • .script developer
  • 4184 posts

Posted 09 January 2007 - 04:17 AM

The point i just don't get, is why everyone wants to create mini versions that have to be extended, instead of a fullfeatured version, where things can get deselected?

That "create mini versions that have to be extended" was the main goal when starting Winbuilder and the projects. It has been proven that we can create a real mini PE already and it is a sound foundation. We wanted to leave the way BartPE creates its PE. Just the basic default ISO created by BartPE is more then 100MB, this includes apps. So we had the idea to create a small foundation and allow people to add to the base to create an ISO to fullfill each users needs. What to include in this base is a topic for discussion. The good thing about this approach is that a basic scripts foundation to create a bootable ISO.

So having a Section in the download Center to be able to download these things based on the needs of the user is a good way to satisfy different users needs. Beta Stage at this moment is the testing of the New Downooad Center. It is still maturing but will develop as time goes on. We also need a way to let the user know with which Project the scripts are compatible with.

Lets take this example:
Some people might still have IDE only drives to deal with in there personal use because they cant upgrade to new Hardware, but a repair person may have bigger needs in creating an all in one PE that can be used to repair and recognize many different PCs in order to be able to repair them. So why should the Basic guy have a bigger PE then he needs. He has no use to stick USB sticks into his PE nor SATA support. He might need Internet access to do research on the problem he has with his personal PC. So discussions like these can hopefully create a basic foundation we can grow on. We just need time to develop Winbuilders foundation an the way projects basic Layout would be considered reasonalble and adequate. Lets not rush it to where it will make it a hassel to later users. As mentioned by some people, that we need to build some standards so when others that will come in the future, will find it easier to adapt to the Winbuilder Project.

#5 TheHive


    Platinum Member

  • .script developer
  • 4184 posts

Posted 09 January 2007 - 04:47 AM

THe basic can also have apps that would be gotten from the XP CD source but these scripts would not be active. They would just be available in the project distribution. It would not make the project bigger since these scripts would not include program files.

#6 MedEvil


    Platinum Member

  • .script developer
  • 7771 posts

Posted 09 January 2007 - 11:08 AM

Maybe i've got the whole basic thing wrong, but to me a basic version for users would mean a PE where everything works to the point, that a user can add his favorite software to it without hassle.
Not a core OS, which requires a diploma to make it usable for everyday usage. :P

It's easier for an admin or technician, to kick things out that he doesn't need, even without this option available in WB, than it is for an everage Joe to put some needed core elements in.

Having an extra folder for 'addons' could be a way, but with script sizes in the kB range, does it really justify the extra inconvenience?

0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users