New puppies are all the same
New puppies are all the same
yes, the apps and look may be different, but that's all.
Re: new puppies
Hi yr1945.
You wrote:
Some Puppy devs continue to have an original approach:
-- josejp2424 with his DPupBuster(s):
http://murga-linux.com/puppy/viewtopic.php?t=118570
-- mistfire with his TazPup:
http://murga-linux.com/puppy/viewtopic.php?t=113255
-- wiak with his FirstRib-WeeDog project:
http://murga-linux.com/puppy/viewtopic.php?t=116212
-- myself with research on other window managers: pekwm, wmx, etc.
-- surely others if you care to dig a little deeper.
Regards.
You wrote:
Depends where you look.yr1945 wrote:yes, the apps and look may be different, but that's all.
Some Puppy devs continue to have an original approach:
-- josejp2424 with his DPupBuster(s):
http://murga-linux.com/puppy/viewtopic.php?t=118570
-- mistfire with his TazPup:
http://murga-linux.com/puppy/viewtopic.php?t=113255
-- wiak with his FirstRib-WeeDog project:
http://murga-linux.com/puppy/viewtopic.php?t=116212
-- myself with research on other window managers: pekwm, wmx, etc.
-- surely others if you care to dig a little deeper.
Regards.
musher0
~~~~~~~~~~
"You want it darker? We kill the flame." (L. Cohen)
~~~~~~~~~~
"You want it darker? We kill the flame." (L. Cohen)
Released versions of Puppy are a known base operating system.
With fully working core Puppy programs.
Using small functional programs, to do just about anything you want to do.
That is an old program. Do not use it anymore, is not Puppy thinking!
Under the hood, a lot of stuff has changed, over the years.
It is up to you to modify Puppy, to how you want it.
Well, what do you think they should change to?
Do not like the look.
Change it. All kinds of eye candy you can add or change.
Do not like the programs.
Add what you like.
With fully working core Puppy programs.
Using small functional programs, to do just about anything you want to do.
That is an old program. Do not use it anymore, is not Puppy thinking!
Under the hood, a lot of stuff has changed, over the years.
It is up to you to modify Puppy, to how you want it.
Well, what do you think they should change to?
Do not like the look.
Change it. All kinds of eye candy you can add or change.
Do not like the programs.
Add what you like.
The things they do not tell you, are usually the clue to solving the problem.
When I was a kid I wanted to be older.... This is not what I expected
YaPI(any iso installer)
When I was a kid I wanted to be older.... This is not what I expected
YaPI(any iso installer)
- Mike Walsh
- Posts: 6351
- Joined: Sat 28 Jun 2014, 12:42
- Location: King's Lynn, UK.
@ yr1945:-
Flash has come straight to the point (as usual! )
What, exactly, are you looking for in an OS? One of the things I've always loved about Puppy is its almost infinite capacity for customization.....limited, literally, by your imagination.
I confess, many of my Puppies have a similar kind of layout.....but that layout has been evolved over time to suit my workflow. Yes, I do occasionally get fed up with being in the same place, and that's when I boot into a different Puppy. However, everything has been set up in such a way that I can carry straight on with whatever I happen to be working on; just in different surroundings!
Like the old adage would have it; "A change is often as good as a rest".....
My current 'take' on Bionicpup64:-
[Click to enlarge]
Mike.
Flash has come straight to the point (as usual! )
What, exactly, are you looking for in an OS? One of the things I've always loved about Puppy is its almost infinite capacity for customization.....limited, literally, by your imagination.
I confess, many of my Puppies have a similar kind of layout.....but that layout has been evolved over time to suit my workflow. Yes, I do occasionally get fed up with being in the same place, and that's when I boot into a different Puppy. However, everything has been set up in such a way that I can carry straight on with whatever I happen to be working on; just in different surroundings!
Like the old adage would have it; "A change is often as good as a rest".....
My current 'take' on Bionicpup64:-
[Click to enlarge]
Mike.
Re: New puppies are all the same
If you're bored, read a book.yr1945 wrote:yes, the apps and look may be different, but that's all.
The purpose of an operating system is to provide a means to run software. We, Humans, recognize and organize visual sensations and primarily use our fingers and hands to alter the present reality. Once there's a 'system in place' with a sizeable user-base innovations tend to be incremental. The greater the change; the greater the learning curve; the lesser the number of users willing to take on that challenge just for the sake of something new.
So, this being Puppy, here's a project for you. Design a computer which --rather than generating images on a monitor-- emits odors; and a track-ball dogs can use to pawipulate an operating system generating, receiving, storing and transmitting information in that form.
So, this being Puppy, here's a project for you. Design a computer which --rather than generating images on a monitor-- emits odors; and a track-ball dogs can use to pawipulate an operating system generating, receiving, storing and transmitting information in that form.
Which version of Linux do you consider is "different" excluding "the apps and look" and in what way?
What difference do you want???
What difference do you want???
LxPup = Puppy + LXDE
Main version used daily: LxPupSc; Assembler of UPups, ScPup & ScPup64, LxPup, LxPupSc & LxPupSc64
Main version used daily: LxPupSc; Assembler of UPups, ScPup & ScPup64, LxPup, LxPupSc & LxPupSc64
- Moose On The Loose
- Posts: 965
- Joined: Thu 24 Feb 2011, 14:54
Re: New puppies are all the same
Airplanes are all the same. The wings go out to the sides and not up and down.yr1945 wrote:yes, the apps and look may be different, but that's all.
Cars are all the same. The wheels are on the bottom.
There is a tendency for all good designs to trend towards being a lot like each other because there is a single maximum they are seeking.
Some things that we should expect as a result.
Fit's law will generally be followed meaning that there will be local menus etc.
Screens are wider than they are tall so the icons for drives will very often run across the screen to make room for many such icons.
People tend to read the upper left corner first so the icons will be put there mostly.
People what to word process, and use a spreadsheet and stuff like that so those tools will be included.
Sharing files over a network is useful so "pnethood" or something like it will be included.
Hi yr1945, I for one think you are (almost) absolutely right, so the others will probably stone me too!
The late Puppys are all built with woof-CE, so my feeling is that what base they use for the build, is more and more irrelevant. As you say, it looks more like separate cosmetic jobs.
But, there are still some exceptions:
May I suggest that you take a look at Barry K's EasyOS and EasyPup?
The late Puppys are all built with woof-CE, so my feeling is that what base they use for the build, is more and more irrelevant. As you say, it looks more like separate cosmetic jobs.
But, there are still some exceptions:
May I suggest that you take a look at Barry K's EasyOS and EasyPup?
True freedom is a live Puppy on a multisession CD/DVD.
EasyOS or Easypup are not Puppy Linux versions.
Barry K even tells you that;
Barry K even tells you that;
He does not use Woof-CE to make them.I guess that I can post this under the Puppy Derivatives category, coz it is a descendant/branch/fork of Puppy. Yet very different in some ways.
The things they do not tell you, are usually the clue to solving the problem.
When I was a kid I wanted to be older.... This is not what I expected
YaPI(any iso installer)
When I was a kid I wanted to be older.... This is not what I expected
YaPI(any iso installer)
- BarryK
- Puppy Master
- Posts: 9392
- Joined: Mon 09 May 2005, 09:23
- Location: Perth, Western Australia
- Contact:
That's right, they are derivatives. EasyOS is built with WoofQ. WoofQ and Woof-CE forked from Woof2, in 2013 I think, and I developed Quirky Linux using WoofQ, which is a full-install only Linux.bigpup wrote:EasyOS or Easypup are not Puppy Linux versions.
Barry K even tells you that;He does not use Woof-CE to make them.I guess that I can post this under the Puppy Derivatives category, coz it is a descendant/branch/fork of Puppy. Yet very different in some ways.
Then retired Quirky and concentrated on EasyOS, another experiment, like Puppy in many way, but designed to support containers from the ground-up.
EasyPup is a very strange one. I took the Woof2/early-Woof-CE of around 2013/2014, mixed with some features from EasyOS. I put this mixing capability into WoofQ. So EasyPup is a mongrel, with some features of EasyOS sans-container-support, and in other ways like classical pups back in 2013/14.
So EasyPup cannot be considered an official pup, but a derivative.
I have some overview pages for these:
https://easyos.org/about/how-and-why-ea ... erent.html
https://bkhome.org/linux/easypup-a-blen ... asyos.html
Both of these are to be considered as experimental. Version 2.3 should be out in a couple of days.
[url]https://bkhome.org/news/[/url]
-
- Posts: 159
- Joined: Sun 01 Mar 2020, 16:17
Thought this thread might be worth tacking on
https://forum.beyond3d.com/threads/linu ... hit.60616/
https://forum.beyond3d.com/threads/linu ... hit.60616/
Yes, it was funny to read. The claims were complete rubbish of course. What it did confirm is that any human who has not used something different or new to them before tends to insult it greatly as unusable. But really, all it means is that they have not taken the time to learn how to use the new device. Every single new mechanism has a learning curve. People who are used to Windows have probably been using it for decades, so they have become used to filling in endless boxes in the various available 'Wizards' in order to get anything done. They have been doing that so long that they may well have mastered the utterly boring and inefficient methodology. Most Windows users have no idea that all complex tasks, even on Windows, can be undertaken very quickly and efficiently via its PowerShell, which is a language of course. Like in life most Windows users have no interest in learning a new language so for such people monotonous 'Wizards' are provided. At least, for the most part, that allows these poor souls to drive the machine via auto-pilot wizards without having to touch the steering wheel, brakes, or indicators, which actually give real control over the 'vehicle'. There certainly is no need to learn how the underlying system works in terms of scheduling and process/thread-handling or so on (leave that to the engineers/computer-scientists) but no harm in learning how to drive the machine more efficiently rather than relying forever on dumbed down less than magic 'Wizards'.Smithy wrote:Thought this thread might be worth tacking on
https://forum.beyond3d.com/threads/linu ... hit.60616/
Some Linux distros try to emulate Windows via various similar wizard guis to fill in the various blanks, but the very basic shell commands are so much easier to use (and certainly much easier than object-oriented PowerShell). But, yes, if a human isn't familiar with something, having never taken any time to learn anything about how to use it, they complain and say that the machine they cannot control is rubbish and useless when really they simply should have stuck to their for-dummies MS Windows boring ugly inefficient totally not magical 'Wizards'. Of course, when the Wizard fails, they then just have to go to a shop and pay for unnecessary 'maintenance' (conned basically) or part with a lot more money for unnecessary purchase of yet another brand new pre-configured machine. Sad really... poor dafts.
You certainly never need to learn how to change the spark plugs in Linux. That is a myth. It is an interesting hobby that some learn (much like car mechanics really) but absolutely no need to really look under the hood. Both my children (one eight years old, and one a teenager) only have Linux on their old laptops, and neither of then know a thing about shell programming (or even the ls command for that matter, sorry...). Yet they never have any problems because even our little Pups and Dogs work perfectly well via their icon and menu-driven interfaces. Certainly, knowing a few extra tricks, helps at times, but utterly non-essential (though you still have to learn how to use the GUI..., which even an 8 year old seems to have no problem with).
NOTE: It is considerably more difficult if you are faced with a big distro like Ubuntu. Suddenly nothing successfully saves, because you are told you do not have the correct permissions... c'est la SUDO issue we on murga-forum love to avoid.
wiak
WeeDogLinux forum: https://weedoglinux.rockedge.org/viewforum.php?f=4
Tiny Linux Blog: https://www.tinylinux.info/
Check Firmware: http://murga-linux.com/puppy/viewtopic.php?p=1022797
Tiny Linux Blog: https://www.tinylinux.info/
Check Firmware: http://murga-linux.com/puppy/viewtopic.php?p=1022797
I wonder if the dude might have had more success trying a puppy linux at the time, sure he would come across the ip tables problems, but network and hardware pickup has always seemed to be good and largely hassle free. Via excepted. And Broadcom.
Maybe UEFI is eventually going to be payware and keys which is fine if people want that, I guess support and conformity will lead to reliability.
Maybe UEFI is eventually going to be payware and keys which is fine if people want that, I guess support and conformity will lead to reliability.
- Mike Walsh
- Posts: 6351
- Joined: Sat 28 Jun 2014, 12:42
- Location: King's Lynn, UK.
Oh, that's comical, Smithy!Smithy wrote:Thought this thread might be worth tacking on
https://forum.beyond3d.com/threads/linu ... hit.60616/
Having read the first 3-4 pages, I have to agree with Will; it was funny.
In a way, it's almost understandable, too. Windows/MacOS users see their OS as a complete, integrated product, with the vendor having total control over it from inception to release. Due to the dichotomy that means "Linux" has become the accepted, generic name for all distros - in much the same way that Hoover has become the recognised term for a vacuum cleaner! - these guys have the greatest of difficulty in understanding the (often fragmented) nature of the open-source community. They see the name 'Linux', and to them that must mean a company producing and distributing the OS from start to finish....
I doubt anyone in that thread would have had the slightest bit of success with trying to explain to tongue_of_calicob (the OP) that the people he was actually finding fault with would have been Canonical. That company have a history, despite producing the most popular, widely-known Linux distribution, of making some totally daft, utterly incomprehensible design decisions.....which, by extension (as far as Joe Public is concerned) gets transferred to the maintainers of the kernel itself. Who do an almost unimaginably successful job of creating a functional hardware/software interface, given the almost complete lack of vendor support from hardware manufacturers.....with many drivers/APIs having to be reverse-engineered from scratch.
What else can you expect, given that due to many questionable practices enacted over the years by various MyCrudSoft CEOs/legal departments, every laptop/tablet/desktop you can purchase in any mainstream chain-store or department store is all equipped the same by default.....and Joe Public gets Whinedoze 11 rammed down his throat whether he wants it or not.
But then Joe Public is easily pleased. So long as he can buy it, take it home, plug it in, switch it on, and can access his Facebook a/c and play with his collection of cat photos, he couldn't care less how it works.
Just that it does.....
Mike.
Last edited by Mike Walsh on Mon 15 Jun 2020, 16:07, edited 1 time in total.