XPuppy Pro for Download
XPuppy Pro for Download
Some forum members would like to see my .jwmrc/fvwm95 files, well guys, here is now what your looking for.
Get the ISO. See screenshot
mirror sites:
http://htb65.de/puppylinux/puppy-releas ... pup202.iso
http://htb65.de/puppylinux/puppy-releas ... so.md5.txt
http://puptrix.org/isos/pup202.iso
http://puptrix.org/isos/pup202.iso.md5.txt
A million thanks to Mark [MU] & Ted:-D
inside this iso;
JWM & FVWM95
007 Blowfish
HCF/SL modem package
icons look-alike XP
with memtest at boot-up (im not that sure)
Get the ISO. See screenshot
mirror sites:
http://htb65.de/puppylinux/puppy-releas ... pup202.iso
http://htb65.de/puppylinux/puppy-releas ... so.md5.txt
http://puptrix.org/isos/pup202.iso
http://puptrix.org/isos/pup202.iso.md5.txt
A million thanks to Mark [MU] & Ted:-D
inside this iso;
JWM & FVWM95
007 Blowfish
HCF/SL modem package
icons look-alike XP
with memtest at boot-up (im not that sure)
Last edited by gliezl on Thu 14 Sep 2006, 04:58, edited 1 time in total.
[color=blue][i]"If you have knowledge, let others light their candles in it."
~Margaret Fuller[/i][/color]
~Margaret Fuller[/i][/color]
- Lobster
- Official Crustacean
- Posts: 15522
- Joined: Wed 04 May 2005, 06:06
- Location: Paradox Realm
- Contact:
Nice
It is more familiar in fvwm95 and I bet that is still very reliable compared to JWM - I always switched to fvwm95 for about 3 or 4 versions of Puppy after JWM became the default . . .
Nice to see my simple 2 line encryption of single files in there 'blowfish 007'
Also included a nice 'world from space' desktop image to choose.
People used to XP might feel more comfortable with the fvwm95 icons and XPuppy Professional familiarity
The rest is all Puppy 2.02 . . .
I think I would use IceVista2 theme, also very reliable, on top of Puppy Gold with Firefox from pupget but that is me.
However I would lose the familair XP icons that Gliezl has collected and included.
The Gxine in this version is more reliable - so if that is important, this is a great ISO download.
Gliezl also created a 1.09CE and 2.02 distro booting from one boot up.
Good to see how people are sharing and uploading, many thanks
Last edited by Lobster on Thu 14 Sep 2006, 15:51, edited 1 time in total.
it is not hard to encrypt a file system using bcrypt
i cleaned up a script i've had for a while, and made it into a demo ... see: bcrypt a file system demo
i cleaned up a script i've had for a while, and made it into a demo ... see: bcrypt a file system demo
Lindows XP
gliezl,
This looks wayyyyyyy too much like Windoze. You should be getting a letter from Microsoft's attorneys soon - just ask Lindows - I mean Linspire!
Well done!
This looks wayyyyyyy too much like Windoze. You should be getting a letter from Microsoft's attorneys soon - just ask Lindows - I mean Linspire!
Well done!
Jam
Hello gliezl !
The Screenshot looks realy awesome.
Can you say please if XPuppy Pro use as default the Double Click for starting application on the Desktop.
I need this information for future puppy linux recomandments to my friends.
Double Click is more easy for new User then Single Click.
It looks like i will recommend XPuppy Pro more than other Puppy Versions for totally linux newbees from now.
One Question at last.
Do you have interest to write a step by step instruction how to build XPuppy Pro from scratch.
Such a howto will bring XPuppy Pro more developers and testers how help improve and test this awsome looking Pup.
Thanks in advance for your answers.
Greetings ARAN.
The Screenshot looks realy awesome.
Can you say please if XPuppy Pro use as default the Double Click for starting application on the Desktop.
I need this information for future puppy linux recomandments to my friends.
Double Click is more easy for new User then Single Click.
It looks like i will recommend XPuppy Pro more than other Puppy Versions for totally linux newbees from now.
One Question at last.
Do you have interest to write a step by step instruction how to build XPuppy Pro from scratch.
Such a howto will bring XPuppy Pro more developers and testers how help improve and test this awsome looking Pup.
Thanks in advance for your answers.
Greetings ARAN.
You are kidding, isn't it?ARAN wrote:Double Click is more easy for new User then Single Click.
I've worked with new users for many years and the single most anoying thing for them is learning the double click, specially the older new users.
They always double click either too fast or two slow or drag the mouse between clicks.
Then there is the fact that even when it's configured with double clicking there are operations that require a single click and they endup double clicking (buttons, menus, browsing, etc).
After I show them how to configure windows to use single click they never go back. The interface becomes consistent. One click for whatever they want to do.
Ups, Gliezl, sorry for hijacking your thread. If someone want's to continue this conversation, let's open another thread.
gliezl
Altough even my windows does not look like windows, I appreciate that many people really feel comfortable with a 'known' appearence.
In any case, it seems that you are having fun customizing Puppy and that is the most important part of this all. Being your goal to have a look-alike desktop, you are very close to achieving that.
[url]http://rarsa.blogspot.com[/url] Covering my eclectic thoughts
[url]http://www.kwlug.org/blog/48[/url] Covering my Linux How-to
[url]http://www.kwlug.org/blog/48[/url] Covering my Linux How-to
man i missed out on being the first to post. DARN! o well i have been playing around with it for a few days now and it seems to be pretty nice although when you restart the fwm95 settings it doesnt reload the xp theme, hmm... i even reset the theme to xp and restarted jwm and it reset it to the puppy look (with a few things still the same) but overall nice really nice!
Re: Lindows XP
thats another thing i was conserned about im sure you broke atleast 15 copyright laws! lol but whos complaining! its all funny, and for fun! again great work keep it up and maybe we can go in together to make a XPuppy Barebones - barebones puppy with XPuppy theme (but maybe we should lave you any remarks to windows and the like so we dont get sued... lol)jam wrote:gliezl,
This looks wayyyyyyy too much like Windoze. You should be getting a letter from Microsoft's attorneys soon - just ask Lindows - I mean Linspire!
Well done!
Great!
That looks absolutely superb!
But I have some questions for anybody who can answer them:
What is 007 blowfish?
What exactly have you done to make it like windows? - have you just added FVWM95 and changed the icons and root menu structure, or do you have JWM looking like Windows also?
Do you think we could make a dotpup or something that would do this to any version of Puppy?
Could we alternatively have the icons and .jwmrc/fvwm95 files separately anyway so people can modify their own puppies?
You are a legend, and did you ever reveal how you do those isos with two distros combined?
But I have some questions for anybody who can answer them:
What is 007 blowfish?
What exactly have you done to make it like windows? - have you just added FVWM95 and changed the icons and root menu structure, or do you have JWM looking like Windows also?
Do you think we could make a dotpup or something that would do this to any version of Puppy?
Could we alternatively have the icons and .jwmrc/fvwm95 files separately anyway so people can modify their own puppies?
You are a legend, and did you ever reveal how you do those isos with two distros combined?
gliezl what a beautiful distro you have created from Puppy
I hope it is okay, I will be messaging you maybe today and asking some questions - is that okay? You may have the answers to several things I have been asking.
And regarding single or double-click mice; I personally prefer single click and agree that brand new users are thoroughly confused with this Microsoft aberration (abomination?), The only caveat I put on that is some laptops are too touchy to use single click, even when you've bust your gut to configure them
Richard in Australia
eagle`s on irc.undernet.org
I hope it is okay, I will be messaging you maybe today and asking some questions - is that okay? You may have the answers to several things I have been asking.
And regarding single or double-click mice; I personally prefer single click and agree that brand new users are thoroughly confused with this Microsoft aberration (abomination?), The only caveat I put on that is some laptops are too touchy to use single click, even when you've bust your gut to configure them
Richard in Australia
eagle`s on irc.undernet.org
[i]Have you noticed editing is always needed for the inevitable typos that weren't there when you hit the "post" button?[/i]
[img]http://micro-hard.dreamhosters.com/416434.png[/img]
[img]http://micro-hard.dreamhosters.com/416434.png[/img]
Hi,kelewax wrote:Hi
Please could you give a description of this iso?
I think there is a good description here at a special page that was made for those interested in an XP look Puppy
Go down to the third lot of screenshots... Enjoy
[i]Have you noticed editing is always needed for the inevitable typos that weren't there when you hit the "post" button?[/i]
[img]http://micro-hard.dreamhosters.com/416434.png[/img]
[img]http://micro-hard.dreamhosters.com/416434.png[/img]
Hi gliesl,
I've noticed there seems to be occasional (not always) difficulties on not just yours, but all of the three "office" type distros I've tried, if you try to remove the CD so that a music CD or a DVD can be played. I wonder if this is fixable in a config file somewhere? It doesn't seem to be there on standard puppies.
Looking more closely at this beautiful looking distro, perhaps your pointer focus could do with being changed as default? This is because it follows the Unix standard whereas I think the people wanting to migrate to it from Windows could be confused with that method.
I remember in the Windows95 "Power Tools" add-on from the development team, there was the Unix style focus offered, but I've never seen a Windows user use it. I know some (myself included) tried it, but preferred the click to focus (and stay focussed) method.
Another thought. Normally a live puppy will present a list of keyboard choices before you have created a save file.
Perhaps you might consider doing a recompile for the benefit of those who don't use the US keyboard? ... doesn't worry me personally, but European keyboards might present a difficulty when booting it for the first time, live.
I do like it
Richard in Australia
I've noticed there seems to be occasional (not always) difficulties on not just yours, but all of the three "office" type distros I've tried, if you try to remove the CD so that a music CD or a DVD can be played. I wonder if this is fixable in a config file somewhere? It doesn't seem to be there on standard puppies.
Looking more closely at this beautiful looking distro, perhaps your pointer focus could do with being changed as default? This is because it follows the Unix standard whereas I think the people wanting to migrate to it from Windows could be confused with that method.
I remember in the Windows95 "Power Tools" add-on from the development team, there was the Unix style focus offered, but I've never seen a Windows user use it. I know some (myself included) tried it, but preferred the click to focus (and stay focussed) method.
Another thought. Normally a live puppy will present a list of keyboard choices before you have created a save file.
Perhaps you might consider doing a recompile for the benefit of those who don't use the US keyboard? ... doesn't worry me personally, but European keyboards might present a difficulty when booting it for the first time, live.
I do like it
Richard in Australia
[i]Have you noticed editing is always needed for the inevitable typos that weren't there when you hit the "post" button?[/i]
[img]http://micro-hard.dreamhosters.com/416434.png[/img]
[img]http://micro-hard.dreamhosters.com/416434.png[/img]
- Pizzasgood
- Posts: 6183
- Joined: Wed 04 May 2005, 20:28
- Location: Knoxville, TN, USA
Maybe you don't have enough ram to load pup_xxx.sfs into ram, so it mounts it from the cd. Try copying that file to the same location as your save-file and then rebooting. It will boot much faster, and then mount it from the harddrive instead of the cd. Then you should be able to remove the disk. If not, something else is the problem.
[size=75]Between depriving a man of one hour from his life and depriving him of his life there exists only a difference of degree. --Muad'Dib[/size]
[img]http://www.browserloadofcoolness.com/sig.png[/img]
[img]http://www.browserloadofcoolness.com/sig.png[/img]
-
- Posts: 622
- Joined: Wed 05 Apr 2006, 20:43
That's a slippery slope there. If people migrate from Windows they are going to have to learn some new skills. Learning never hurt anyone. Actually, it's a good thing. Way better than taking a work of genius like Puppy and dumbing it down to the level of a Microsoft product.richard.a wrote:...perhaps your pointer focus could do with being changed as default? This is because it follows the Unix standard whereas I think the people wanting to migrate to it from Windows could be confused with that method.
Perhaps. I would have thought that 512Mb would be enough. I'll look again. The machine was quite old, maybe a more modern one would do better.Pizzasgood wrote:Maybe you don't have enough ram to load pup_xxx.sfs into ram, so it mounts it from the cd. Try copying that file to the same location as your save-file and then rebooting. It will boot much faster, and then mount it from the harddrive instead of the cd. Then you should be able to remove the disk. If not, something else is the problem.
Checking the iso sizes for comparison, one can note that gliesl's was 78Mb, not much more than the 73 megs of the 2.02 seamonkey; whereas the other two were 232Mb and 184Mb, so perhaps it's the case there.
I don't see it as dumbing down, because it has been the PuppyLinux default on the small number of Puppy distros I have tried.marksouth2000 wrote:That's a slippery slope there. If people migrate from Windows they are going to have to learn some new skills. Learning never hurt anyone. Actually, it's a good thing. Way better than taking a work of genius like Puppy and dumbing it down to the level of a Microsoft product.richard.a wrote:...perhaps your pointer focus could do with being changed as default? This is because it follows the Unix standard whereas I think the people wanting to migrate to it from Windows could be confused with that method.
I would have have thought that the two modus operandi being so totally different, the standard default would have been used. This way the person can make the conscious choice to go the other route themselves - when and if they are ready to do so.
Isn't there enough difference to be negotiated already (by someone never exposed to other systems) - without adding another one unnecessarily? Do we really want to encourage them to try Linux? Or do we want to keep it a club for geeks?
Could this be a major reason why many other migratory choices have failed? Perhaps we can note the big corporate installations of Linux all make it as basic as they can. Talking Sun and SuSE specifically. And, I'm not being negative. I've listened to Windows users and their comments.
Here is a comparison...
One of the main reasons railway locomotive controls and aircraft controls are basically similar in their own environments is to make it simpler for the operators to "convert" from one version/brand/type/whatever to another with only the essential differences having to be picked up before the operator can be certified as being comfortable with the new elements of their system. Same goes for back-hoe excavators, B-double tractor-trailer rigs, even family cars.
Surely the wheel should never need to be reinvented.
Not really much different for power users of computers in their MO, although I grant you the responsibility for lives is markedly different from that of locomotive drivers and airline pilots.
Productivity is the name of their game. You waste time having to remember that the mouse pointer can't be allowed to move with building or desk vibration - or even gravity - and you will dismiss the product totally out of hand and go back to what you know works. Really.
Just my thoughts. Been there, done that. I'm not a geek. I was raised from 1986 (PC-DOS) through about 1992 (Windows 3.0 and OS/2).
[i]Have you noticed editing is always needed for the inevitable typos that weren't there when you hit the "post" button?[/i]
[img]http://micro-hard.dreamhosters.com/416434.png[/img]
[img]http://micro-hard.dreamhosters.com/416434.png[/img]