Hi,
>
> And then I expressed some concerns with how this terminology
> integrates with the bigger picture on
> https://labs.riseup.net/code/issues/8776,
>
Something that needs clarified is precisely where does Tails start and
end.
If Tails is a system made up of individual parts (like most) then the
Tails experience must include the syslinux boot experience, which
conflicts with 'Start Tails' in the Greeter actually "starting" Tails.
Tails is also the only thing on the USB Stick when installed.
However, most people will not want or need to see this screen, such is
the logic behind having the timer to auto boot. But that doesn't mean
the process isn't part of Tails, especially since it is sandwiched
between the self-tests and the users intended experience.
I hypothesize that after testing, most users will agree that the entire
experience is a Tails experience *and* that 'Start Tails' from the
Greeter makes the most sense since people start a computer and arrive at
the desktop environment. This highlights the temporary stop at the
syslinux boot dialog as the quagmire but we would need to compare the
Greeter location to 'Start Tails' as the syslinux boot menu options
directly.
The logic behind 'Start Tails' in the Greeter is solid, though, since
people will *not* want to start Tails without checking or editing the
settings to ensure that they are safe, something we emphasize in
documentation and in our upcoming Greeter experience.
Whether we keep displaying the syslinux boot dialog or not (temporarily
or forever), we need to make sure we establish a consensus on the form
Tails takes and communicate that with consistency in the experience.
>
> sajolida, who still was wise enough to turn
> the problem into something that needs to be user-tested:
> https://labs.riseup.net/code/issues/8238 (which will need to have the
> doc updated accordingly, by the way).
>
But let's test :)
Wordlife,
Spencer
