Victor Chew wrote:
How about "Free service"?
I have not specifically searched for the license, but I would tend to think that at least BKO is not "freeware" (as in "free to use but close-source or something of that sort) but GPL'ed or similar.
I still think that all those sites (related to PXE / gPXE / iPXE / ...) are not needed in the main list. Maybe a paragraph mentioning them in the main page, but not in the list. A "too-big" list tends to be less useful for new users, which are the ones really needing it.
Do you think it is better to keep an older version of the main program (the back-end scanner) because the front-end is not being maintained?
I am at a bind here. I think a frontend is important, otherwise most users will be at a loss.
That's why I mentioned a front-end (or even two) for ClamAV. Having an antivirus scanner which is not updated to its best version (and/or without updated databases) only gives a false sense of security (the results of such scanner are not really useful). For those users wanting to use f-prot, having the latest version available makes more sense.
I like being able to pop in the CD and be able to do a first scan immediately instead of waiting for 5~10 mins for the download.
But the user is waiting for the download anyway. Moreover, the user waits twice. The first time, when the user downloads the released UBCD ISO image. The original image is useful just for a while (for antivirus scanning purposes). After some time, the databases are not updated enough to be worth scanning with them, so the user shall update them anyway before scanning. That's the second time, if not more. Scanning with old databases is not a good idea, at all. If a newbie doesn't know about this basic principle of antivirus usage, then "forcing" the update is much better than blindly using old databases. By not adding the antivirus databases, you are saving space and download times (instead of having to download the databases twice) and also helping newbies to use an antivirus correctly.
In addition, when booting PMagic, no database means less booting time (no need to expand the huge database package, less RAM needed for booting).
So in fact, by skipping the antivirus databases in the original release of UBCD, you save
time. I can only see pros, no cons.
BTW, other PMagic modules that used to be included in UBCD also need to be updated, or they won't show up in new PMagic releases.
Which release are you referring to? I am using 2012_09_12, just one release behind the current one, and the modules (XFPROT, PCRegEdit etc.) show up OK.
Hmm, then I need to check my customized UBCD. Thanks.
About the language selection, IMH
O it is not worth the additional complications. Most programs in FDUBCD are English only, and changing the keyboard language before getting to the DOS prompt has almost no use in FDUBCD. For someone that really needs to change the keyboard language, it can be done from the DOS prompt after booting. Outside FDUBCD, each distro has the possibility to do it by itself, and I would consider supporting Linux distros to be outside the scope of UBCD anyway.