Puppy Conclusion
Live Distro of the Year - of all time - to date
http://www.linuxquestions.org/awards
http://www.linuxquestions.org/questions ... e&t=514938
Now if you read all the comments made by those who voted on their particular distro and those of Puppy you may come to a particular conclusion.
My conclusion is that, having tried many other "Live Linux Distros" that they are primarly used to test the particular distro before a HD install or in a rescue situation of a system, particularly Windows.
Now in the comments made it seems that only those who use Puppy use it as their primary OS and from the CD, ie no HD install.
Those who voted didnt state if what they voted for was there primary OS and if they used it as intended from the LIVE CD and not as a HD install.
If this was the criteria for voting on the Live Distro of the Year, the results would be different. And in fact that really ought to be the criteria.
I think that many of those distros cram about 2 gigs on a 700meg CD.
It seems that they are going for quanity over quality (of functionality). They could very well take a Puppy approach - the way that "cutting edge" of modules are being considered.
Have the core OS loaded, call up and mount only that which is called for - keep loaded until quit, free ram - everything else unmounted -ability of CD removal.
Only then could they begin to compete with Puppy.
From a user point of view if there is a delay in loading an application initially, that is acceptable - one time delay - without any subsequent delay in using that application. And such a delay would only occur once the application is quit and needs to be reloaded. In other words once you have all the apps. that you will be using - everything else is unmounted and needs to be mounted before its use and any such delay is one time and acceptable. This is a way for low ram machines to work in ram only and have access to limitless volume of software, and if you have the ram you dont need to quit any of the apps. loaded.
It would make absolutely no difference how large the CD or DVD is, it would be of no consequence. HD install is not the answer, you loose the security of a Live CD. Oh ya once the apps. are loaded you must have the ability to remove the CD from the machine.
Is this really that hard to achieve?
As I see it, this is really the next step in the evolution of the "Live CD distro".
That doesnt mean that the size and type of distro that Barry K. created will not be either the most common and/or the most popular.
http://www.murga-linux.com/puppy/viewtopic.php?t=15862
"Puppy is the greatest thing to happen to Linux, to the humanity of computing and those with real experience or so called computing professionals who dont realize this havent really learned anything."
Live Distro of the Year - of all time - to date
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The following are statements from the poll done on "Live Distro of the Year"
"Though I always have Knoppix on me at almost all times and it has saved my rear on more than 3 occasions this year with things like hard drive failures I will have to vote for Puppy.
I've been using Puppy linux and it's ability to save sessions to disc to introduce my fiance to linux over her mother's virus-ridden crapbox. With our odd schedules and too-complicated-and-stupid-to-explain-here predicament we've found ourselves in, we use the internet to speak with each other each night beyond the telephone. Since the computer she uses is essentially walking death and is in need of an OS reinstall I gave her a Puppy CD and showed her how to use it an explained to her about what she can do with it. She absolutely loves it and for more than just not having to use the leprous hard drive.
"I'm using it to spread the word about linux, basically, and it's catching on. I vote it as my LiveCD of 2006 over Knoppix this time around because I don't really know where our relationship would be without it."
I would say Kanotix, but since there hasn't been an updated Kanotix version in quite a while, I will go with Puppy. Puppy is nice and small and boots very quickly.
The cool thing is that you can run it in qemu in windows and linux."
"I voted for Puppy, as it is very light, & still quite complete, however, for testing & diagnosticing purposes (other people's PC), I also use a lot SimplyMepis & PCLinuxOS..."
"Puppy - because the hd of my laptop died."
"Been there seen it worn the teashirt etc since about 6 years ago. Now I'm only running Puppy Linux (Rudy version) it's a live CD but has a full installer.
http://puppylinux.org/user/viewpage.php?page_id=1
Try it before you vote.
I've tried, Ubuntu, Kbuntu, PcLinux (large and small), SUSE (also very good),
DSL, Fedora, Corel, Mandrake (also good), Knoppix (good), Linspire amongst other.
My 2400 Athglon boots in under 40 seconds and closes down in 9
How about yours?"
"Puppy - easy to mount drives, easy to network. Even I can do it!"
"Puppy! w00f! Because it is PRIMARILY a livecd linux distribution.
For a very light distribution, they put ALOT of effort to make the GUI nice, complete and useful. It has plenty of options for anything you're looking to do. I always have a Puppy CD near by."
"Puppy for me
Puppy has got to be a top choice. Its fast, Its simple to learn, the forum is great.Heck it even helped me save the information off a hard drive the so called "Experts" said could not even be accessed, while I was still an absolute newbie."
"I love this Puppy!
Just discovered Puppy. Can't believe it. Click..BAM! (Loads from ram). It even let me use my LT modem in my Thinkpad and I was on the net! I have a lot to learn so I will be soaking up a lot of information about this distro."
"Puppy is not just for older machines....
I just thought I would comment about a couple of statements about Puppy Linux being good /aimed at older hardware... while it works well with older hardware puppy is no slouch with the newer stuff either, Barry K and the Dev's of that marvel are doing some real innovative stuff,example 'dynamic driver loading' Check out 2.13 to see what I mean.
I now return you to your regular schedule ......."
"I voted for Knoppix, then read all your posts about Puppy. So I gave it a try, and wow! Now here's a live distro that really has some creativity. I'm really impressed at how much Barry was able to pack into a 86MB iso file. It's so small, so fast, and works so well. Really impressed by its hardware detection and ease of setting up network. I'm glad I read this thread and found out about this great live distro.
(Just one thing I wish Puppy had was WPA_supplicant because I use WPA Personal at home. But I think in the README, Barry mentioned he's still working on the wireless stuff.)
BTW, I like the puppy bark sound when you boot into the system. Neat. =) Wonder if that was from Barry's own puppy."
"Puppy rules!! I use it in a class I teach, and it gets the job done fast and well."
"I have to cast my Vote for Puppy Linux.
Not only is Puppy the Quickest Distro around but it also makes it easier to learn how Linux works.
It has the most friendly helpful forum and you may even get a reply from the Creator of Puppy himself.
I am sending this vote to you from an installed version of Puppy and have added with help from the forum alot of extra Packages.Gimp, Open Office, Opera, Qcad, amsn,xaralx, Mplayer, VLC Player, Audacity, cinepaint, realplayer, gtkpod, acrobat, gqview, xnview, drawswf and more!
Did you know Puppy plays Encryted DVD's has Winmodem support (using it now!) comes with alot of Win32 codecs as standard. Lets see Mepis, SuSe, Mandriva, Ubuntu, Fedora do that. I use to be a Mepis user but got sick of friends sending emails with attachments Mepis just didn't want to open. Not good enough.
As Puppy seems the closest to Slackware then I vote Slackware as my runner up.
My advice is keep an eye on Puppy as things are only going to get better from the coming year."
"Puppy is my favourite
I have found Puppy is very beginner-friendly, is small enough to download quickly, and has everything I need, and I have had excellent support from the forum."
"Puppy just keeps getting better, faster, and with loads of derivatives. I've tried to re-install windows XP and it has been more hassle than Puppy!
Only reason I'm putting XP back on is for Dragon dictate when I have to do large amounts of typing (I have RSI), everything else is Puppy."
"Definitely Puppy. It's a good way to, uh, test the water. Very easy to customize too..."
"Puppy for me
Its the little Steam Engine that could. I like how easy it is to create customized versions of Puppy. It keeps getting better all the time. I still haven't installed it on my hard drive because saving back to the disc works just great(o.k. I lied somewhat. I do use the hard drive for swap and configuration storage - but no full blown install). Puppy is small, fast, and customizable. For those of you who like a little more eyecandy or find their desktop enviroment lacking try Muppy or Mean Puppy. Best way to Users Remasters is too checkout the Announce page in the forums or do a search for a particular Remaster. I believe the Main Website has a section that list some of the more Popular Remastered Puppies."
"I vote Puppy. It's by far the quickest live cd I've used."
"Puppy of course, because it's small and powerful. Plus the people on the forums rock!"
"I seldom use live distros and therefore have only tried six (two are not listed as choices in the poll): SimplyMEPIS, PCLinuxOS, Puppy, Mandriva One, Mandriva Move, and Linspire Live. All of them except Puppy are comparatively large and slow. That is why Puppy gets my vote. It gets the job done and doesn't kill off your laptop battery by constantly accessing the CD. I also understand that when booting from USB (something I have not yet tried), Puppy minimizes writes, enhancing USB key life."
"puppy for me
puppy, hands down, is the live distro i use. although i also seem to like simplymepis(live), ubuntu(live) and gentoo(live) those distros are mainly used as installed distros where as puppy is almost entirely live."
"I like your choices. Strictly as a Live CD (only), Puppy is definitely hard to beat. When using a Live CD as the basis for installing a desktop system, then I really like SimplyMEPIS."
#################################################
Puppy Conclusion
-
Mic67
The fact that many have choosen the likes of larger Puppy variants shows that there is an interest in having them.
Now if they worked as the "other live distros", they would not be Puppy. Those that use Puppy and have tried other live distros know exactly what I mean.
With my suggestion:
"Have the core OS loaded, call up and mount only that which is called for - keep loaded until quit, free ram - everything else unmounted -ability of CD removal."
"It would make absolutely no difference how large the CD or DVD is, it would be of no consequence."
Therefore you get quanity with quality.
It is the logical evolution of the Live CD.
Customising Puppy would then be based on which set of apps. you choose to use for each session. Developement would then focus on the core OS, rather then spending that time in creating variants.
If 2 gigs can go on a 700meg CD, you could have a choice of windows managers, browsers, pretty much anything. I wont bother with the multitude of possibles of how that could be done in terms of configuring that system. Nor technically how that could be achieve, I am too much of a newbie. But I believe it is do-able.
What are the other possible evolutions of the Live CD?
Now if they worked as the "other live distros", they would not be Puppy. Those that use Puppy and have tried other live distros know exactly what I mean.
With my suggestion:
"Have the core OS loaded, call up and mount only that which is called for - keep loaded until quit, free ram - everything else unmounted -ability of CD removal."
"It would make absolutely no difference how large the CD or DVD is, it would be of no consequence."
Therefore you get quanity with quality.
It is the logical evolution of the Live CD.
Customising Puppy would then be based on which set of apps. you choose to use for each session. Developement would then focus on the core OS, rather then spending that time in creating variants.
If 2 gigs can go on a 700meg CD, you could have a choice of windows managers, browsers, pretty much anything. I wont bother with the multitude of possibles of how that could be done in terms of configuring that system. Nor technically how that could be achieve, I am too much of a newbie. But I believe it is do-able.
What are the other possible evolutions of the Live CD?
-
Billwho?
- Posts: 559
- Joined: Tue 06 Dec 2005, 09:28
- Location: still "In The Dog House" East Coast Oz
Trialing 4.20
Puppy best by a long way!
Thats the conclusion I reached whenever I was reading the comments on the poll. By my estimation better than 50% of the comments left were in favour of Puppy but only 6.78% of the votes went to Puppy. Guess that shows most who vote don't leave a comment.
Thats the conclusion I reached whenever I was reading the comments on the poll. By my estimation better than 50% of the comments left were in favour of Puppy but only 6.78% of the votes went to Puppy. Guess that shows most who vote don't leave a comment.
Linux = Learning through doing :shock: :? :D
The learning curve may be steep but there is a light at the end of the tunnel.
You just have to pass the occasional oncoming train to get there.
The learning curve may be steep but there is a light at the end of the tunnel.
You just have to pass the occasional oncoming train to get there.
there's been a lot of ways to talk about evolving puppy.
one weakness of your idea (it seems) is that ultimately you'd need a dvd writer and a bootable dvd rom, which means half the computers in use won't use it. then again, i guess there are some 700mb cd's that actually work, but mostly i see cdroms that can't handle burning (or reading) that far.
then there's the scalability of ram (good move) but not of the download. i wouldn't have/couldn't have tried puppy if it was 700mb, i found it because it's small. in fact i was looking for something smaller, but i heard so many good things i thought, 60-something mb (yes 60) wth? let's try it. it took 4 hours to download, it wasn't doing a full 4kbytes/s
doing it your way is an interesting thought and an interesting capability to have, but there are ways with still more simplicity, and still more benefits. considering that sheer number of things that are currently a work in progress vs. working and in progress in puppy right now, simplicity should be a mantra i think. sage says: i'll repeat yet again: development (or maybe releases? i add) should stop until pet package management is working. maybe.
.sfs file handling we're talking a lot about upgrading that... giving puppy 2 a little more dynamic management like puppy 1 had.
this means you can have barebones, medium (typical style and default) puppy, and add bigger .sfs files on startup using either of two very simple methods... it's got lots of potential. it may even dynamically load .sfs files just like what you're talking about, with a gui wizard no less.
however, it also means that you can download something that is less than 100mb (very cool) and if you want, download more .sfs files or a collection.
what does it mean to have a smaller than 600mb distro? it means you're paying more attention, for one thing. you think you can have quality and quantity, but every time you add 5 features, maintaining the other existing features gets just a little less attention. we're not a huge community, we're not likely to be a huge community soon. have everyone working on a 600mb distro and nothing will ever work the same again. it's bad enough we have to deal with so much output in terms of timeframe.
quantity over quality is really hard to avoid. start with puppy and you start with a "leg up" on the competition (so to speak.) don't give up your edge- don't burn to the edge. puppy is better because of the things that makes it different, small size should never be underestimated. sorry for a the stupid metaphor but picture a 100lb chihuahua. what are you going to do with that? really, it matters. not significantly at first...
one weakness of your idea (it seems) is that ultimately you'd need a dvd writer and a bootable dvd rom, which means half the computers in use won't use it. then again, i guess there are some 700mb cd's that actually work, but mostly i see cdroms that can't handle burning (or reading) that far.
then there's the scalability of ram (good move) but not of the download. i wouldn't have/couldn't have tried puppy if it was 700mb, i found it because it's small. in fact i was looking for something smaller, but i heard so many good things i thought, 60-something mb (yes 60) wth? let's try it. it took 4 hours to download, it wasn't doing a full 4kbytes/s
doing it your way is an interesting thought and an interesting capability to have, but there are ways with still more simplicity, and still more benefits. considering that sheer number of things that are currently a work in progress vs. working and in progress in puppy right now, simplicity should be a mantra i think. sage says: i'll repeat yet again: development (or maybe releases? i add) should stop until pet package management is working. maybe.
.sfs file handling we're talking a lot about upgrading that... giving puppy 2 a little more dynamic management like puppy 1 had.
this means you can have barebones, medium (typical style and default) puppy, and add bigger .sfs files on startup using either of two very simple methods... it's got lots of potential. it may even dynamically load .sfs files just like what you're talking about, with a gui wizard no less.
however, it also means that you can download something that is less than 100mb (very cool) and if you want, download more .sfs files or a collection.
what does it mean to have a smaller than 600mb distro? it means you're paying more attention, for one thing. you think you can have quality and quantity, but every time you add 5 features, maintaining the other existing features gets just a little less attention. we're not a huge community, we're not likely to be a huge community soon. have everyone working on a 600mb distro and nothing will ever work the same again. it's bad enough we have to deal with so much output in terms of timeframe.
quantity over quality is really hard to avoid. start with puppy and you start with a "leg up" on the competition (so to speak.) don't give up your edge- don't burn to the edge. puppy is better because of the things that makes it different, small size should never be underestimated. sorry for a the stupid metaphor but picture a 100lb chihuahua. what are you going to do with that? really, it matters. not significantly at first...
-
Mic67
I dont understand why one would need a dvd writer? What was suggested could work on a reg. CD of 650-700 megs. or what ever the capacity is. This would be the same as the other large live CD distros.
Sure these large ISO's would be an issue for some (maybe quite a few) that is why Barry K. official distro would still be popular.
From a users point of view (newbie too)not that many remaster (I havent) and I think they may opt for a HD install? Or just use as is and maybe add a few apps. thus the popularity of Muppy, Rudy, etc.. I havent done much research into how or why puppy works or even what an .sfs file is, although I do have some ideas. My interest has been in actually using Puppy as intended with emphasis on stability and security achieved by Kernel & TCP Tuning, as well as the IPTABLES Firewall - with great success. Again, after only 4 months of using Linux, I would not have even been able to achieve this with any other distro.
I think that many newbies just want to use "off the shelf" and not have to understand how or why Puppy works other than from a users point of view.
Having as many applications available, with minimun RAM requirements as possible -by mounting only what you want or need in terms of specific applications and not modules of a bunch of applications - and the ability to free ram when the app. is unloaded makes this possible. Again the ability to remove the CD disk at every instance - once you load an application, of course putting it back in to install any other application.
There is no other distro that offers what Puppy does in so many ways, or even comes close. That I do understand from both a user and tech. point of view, and that really ought to be obivious.
Keep it simple is right, Barry K. has achieve this to the extent greater than any other Linux distro.
SFS files, remastering are good options for some but not most.
I believe that for the "other" larger distro. to implement what I am suggesting would not require reinventing anything, Puppy has lead the way. By being able to achive scalability of ram and offering a large library of apps.. A live CD (dvd, etc) just makes so much sense - a fresh OS at every reboot.
Sure these large ISO's would be an issue for some (maybe quite a few) that is why Barry K. official distro would still be popular.
From a users point of view (newbie too)not that many remaster (I havent) and I think they may opt for a HD install? Or just use as is and maybe add a few apps. thus the popularity of Muppy, Rudy, etc.. I havent done much research into how or why puppy works or even what an .sfs file is, although I do have some ideas. My interest has been in actually using Puppy as intended with emphasis on stability and security achieved by Kernel & TCP Tuning, as well as the IPTABLES Firewall - with great success. Again, after only 4 months of using Linux, I would not have even been able to achieve this with any other distro.
I think that many newbies just want to use "off the shelf" and not have to understand how or why Puppy works other than from a users point of view.
Having as many applications available, with minimun RAM requirements as possible -by mounting only what you want or need in terms of specific applications and not modules of a bunch of applications - and the ability to free ram when the app. is unloaded makes this possible. Again the ability to remove the CD disk at every instance - once you load an application, of course putting it back in to install any other application.
There is no other distro that offers what Puppy does in so many ways, or even comes close. That I do understand from both a user and tech. point of view, and that really ought to be obivious.
Keep it simple is right, Barry K. has achieve this to the extent greater than any other Linux distro.
SFS files, remastering are good options for some but not most.
I believe that for the "other" larger distro. to implement what I am suggesting would not require reinventing anything, Puppy has lead the way. By being able to achive scalability of ram and offering a large library of apps.. A live CD (dvd, etc) just makes so much sense - a fresh OS at every reboot.
put simply: to write dvd's. it irks me a bit that your questions seem to center around "why bother making puppy small? why not cater to the same people all the other distro's do? why not take away anything that sets puppy apart from the other distros?"I dont understand why one would need a dvd writer? What was suggested could work on a reg. CD of 650-700 megs. or what ever the capacity is. This would be the same as the other large live CD distros.
i'm totally putting words in your mouth, but i hope i've made some point here. flash (no offense) does the same thing sometimes... "puppy is meant to boot from cd" as if that means *you* are meant to boot puppy from cd. and yet the grub wizard (included in puppy) recommends a full install over a frugal install, and i own a few computers, not ONE of which will boot puppy from cd. i use puppy as a boot cd on other machines outside my home.
the point? puppy has options other distros really do not. you're not talking about adding anything except bloat, you are talking about removing features and advantages *almost* unique to puppy.
it is far more friendly and fun to use than any other small distro, dsl and feather are BORING and puppy is more flexible. it can become larger VERY easily and then go back onto a cd
man, that couldn't possibly be more wrong. barry has said he doesn't even want to maintain his distro, he only wants to fiddle with it and experiment. it's up to us to make something usable of it. There Is No Barry Official Distro. you're thinking of CESure these large ISO's would be an issue for some (maybe quite a few) that is why Barry K. official distro would still be popular.
i have no intention of that changing.Keep it simple is right, Barry K. has achieve this to the extent greater than any other Linux distro.
why, because when you think about how it all works, .sfs sounds complicated to you? there are a LOT of complex tricks that puppy has always pulled under the hood that complicate it- in a good way. and the any issue for the user is simplicity as a result. remove the cd from the drive and it still works. try that in uBLOATu!SFS files, remastering are good options for some but not most.
.sfs is implemented seamlessly, invisibly to make puppy more flexible. if you do not like the proposed ui to make it less invisible and more customizable, there are other, simpler ways i'm in favor of.
ways AS SIMPLE as clicking an icon that says "go deluxe."
think about it, and please don't base your assumptions on the least of .sfs's implementations. i agree with you on the benefits of live-cd, and i have no intention at all of removing those benefits, nor of seeing them removed. you think .sfs means an end to the live cd... on the contrary- if it's done right.
people are talking about how to make puppy more flexible, they are not always talking about the best way to do it. the ways i've proposed would NOT stop puppy from being a live cd, they would NOT prevent a larger live cd, but unlike your idea of simplicity, they would also NOT prevent a small cd- both would be easy, vs. your only one would be.
lead the way? like fat white settlers on the coast of the americas, or like napolean en route to waterloo?I believe that for the "other" larger distro. to implement what I am suggesting would not require reinventing anything, Puppy has lead the way.
leading is no good without a good direction. i dare to say mic, what you are talking about is abandoning the lead. puppy IS doing things no other distro can.
what you are talking about is ceasing to lead, and *following* the less amazing and less special distros. that's what's so annoying to me. not that any of it is personal, but i hope you look a little harder at what so many of us are now talking about- because it's not what you're saying it is- at all.
now to be a little more constructive.
one of the powers of .sfs is that you could create a live cd with three sizes:
download puppy ce deluxe 380mb
this is puppy barebones and core.sfs with ALL other .sfs files.
download puppy ce *standard* 85mb
this is puppy barebones with core.sfs which loads by default.
download puppy ce barebones 50mb
this is puppy barebones
note that all of these distros are smaller than the big fat fattys out there.
so puppy transparently scans for the sfs files, FROM the live cd!
and it gives you this:
1. boot puppy deluxe (default) <- this times out in n seconds
2. boot puppy standard <- this option is the default and option number 1, if the deluxe .sfs FILES are not found.
3. boot barebones <- LOOK! AS A STARTUP OPTION!
now a save file COULD STILL BE USEFUL- it could save the boot option so that on startup you didn't have to bother with a menu. and you could have an icon somewhere or in the menu that said Go Deluxe or whatever.
and a fancy .sfs handler liek sunburnts COULD STILL BE USEFUL... because it could let you add non-standard sfs modules to bloat puppy up further if that's your perversion.
a fancy .sfs handler could also scale deluxe up and down... since "deluxe" really refers to a collection of .sfs files, it could choose which ones. by default, deluxe is 380mb. but if you wanted kde and not ooo, or oo and not kde, you could OPTIONALLY turn parts of deluxe off to gain more ram.
You Would Never Have To if you can run a bloated, 380mb livecd by default.
also: we could have our 85mb puppy, easily.
but it would add 4-5 seconds to the boot time to do it this way. you'd gain a LOT of simplicity.
and don't knock the remaster script if you haven't tried it. it's a powerful tool for making a live cd (you like live cd's right?) that is specifically made for you the way you personally like. what's not to love about a feature like that?
picture simplicity, i'll picture it with you, but don't picture less flexibility. that's windows.
one of the powers of .sfs is that you could create a live cd with three sizes:
download puppy ce deluxe 380mb
this is puppy barebones and core.sfs with ALL other .sfs files.
download puppy ce *standard* 85mb
this is puppy barebones with core.sfs which loads by default.
download puppy ce barebones 50mb
this is puppy barebones
note that all of these distros are smaller than the big fat fattys out there.
so puppy transparently scans for the sfs files, FROM the live cd!
and it gives you this:
1. boot puppy deluxe (default) <- this times out in n seconds
2. boot puppy standard <- this option is the default and option number 1, if the deluxe .sfs FILES are not found.
3. boot barebones <- LOOK! AS A STARTUP OPTION!
now a save file COULD STILL BE USEFUL- it could save the boot option so that on startup you didn't have to bother with a menu. and you could have an icon somewhere or in the menu that said Go Deluxe or whatever.
and a fancy .sfs handler liek sunburnts COULD STILL BE USEFUL... because it could let you add non-standard sfs modules to bloat puppy up further if that's your perversion.
a fancy .sfs handler could also scale deluxe up and down... since "deluxe" really refers to a collection of .sfs files, it could choose which ones. by default, deluxe is 380mb. but if you wanted kde and not ooo, or oo and not kde, you could OPTIONALLY turn parts of deluxe off to gain more ram.
You Would Never Have To if you can run a bloated, 380mb livecd by default.
also: we could have our 85mb puppy, easily.
but it would add 4-5 seconds to the boot time to do it this way. you'd gain a LOT of simplicity.
and don't knock the remaster script if you haven't tried it. it's a powerful tool for making a live cd (you like live cd's right?) that is specifically made for you the way you personally like. what's not to love about a feature like that?
picture simplicity, i'll picture it with you, but don't picture less flexibility. that's windows.
-
Mic67
Well from the way that you describe it, its interesting but sort of an interm evolution compared to what I was suggesting. The "bare" puppy purpose who be as a base to remaster into a custom puppy, which is really the only reason I can think of. The "standard" puppy would tend to be for those whose machine has limited resources like RAM or CPU.
With the module thing I was thinking that the modules would be rather specific:
-module for networking
-graphics module
-office module
And those sort of things.
But doing it that way could also have issues.
But when you add non-standard sfs modules, undoubtably you will be adding that which will probably include that which is either of no use to you or interested but will consume resources by being mounted.
Adding to the boot time really is a non-issue as it is a one time thing, sort of like when you mount an application on demand as I am suggesting, particularly when it allows you to control the resources that the Operating system uses.
I have tried the remaster script, well that was a while ago and as I recall that you had to have a pup save file before you had to do so, I think I sort of tried it both ways - no joy. Part of the reasoning why I havent pursued this is using the stock puppy has the benefit of knowing that any issues is inherent in the developed distro and not as the result of any remaster. Which ought not be an issue, but..... (Why bother when you can use Muppy or Rudy - instantly)
Remastering does make alot of sense... But I really do believe that most, particularly newbies dont and probably never will, hence the popularity of Muppy, and Rudy and the proliferation of many new ones. Which if people could make their own why have these become popular?
I believe the ultimate flexibility is as I suggested it and is the true evolution of the Live CD.
Or the answer is a 2 gig or 4 gig RAM machine that loads those other (knoppix Mephis) totally to memory. I sort of wonder if that is possible even now with some adjustments. The alternative is as was previous suggested, application mounted only on demand. I know that is the way they work now, but with the way the memory system works there is just way to much lag.
Only when these OTHER Distros can achive this will there really be any competition to Puppy. I think that those who have used both know that.
I havent done alot of research but there is something called "accelerated Knoppix", but I think it is sort of like a remaster on a different medium, whether good or not, useful or not, it might be of interest to some if just to determine what is not useful. Currently I have no opinion or thoughts on it.
########################################
With the module thing I was thinking that the modules would be rather specific:
-module for networking
-graphics module
-office module
And those sort of things.
But doing it that way could also have issues.
But when you add non-standard sfs modules, undoubtably you will be adding that which will probably include that which is either of no use to you or interested but will consume resources by being mounted.
Adding to the boot time really is a non-issue as it is a one time thing, sort of like when you mount an application on demand as I am suggesting, particularly when it allows you to control the resources that the Operating system uses.
I have tried the remaster script, well that was a while ago and as I recall that you had to have a pup save file before you had to do so, I think I sort of tried it both ways - no joy. Part of the reasoning why I havent pursued this is using the stock puppy has the benefit of knowing that any issues is inherent in the developed distro and not as the result of any remaster. Which ought not be an issue, but..... (Why bother when you can use Muppy or Rudy - instantly)
Remastering does make alot of sense... But I really do believe that most, particularly newbies dont and probably never will, hence the popularity of Muppy, and Rudy and the proliferation of many new ones. Which if people could make their own why have these become popular?
I believe the ultimate flexibility is as I suggested it and is the true evolution of the Live CD.
Or the answer is a 2 gig or 4 gig RAM machine that loads those other (knoppix Mephis) totally to memory. I sort of wonder if that is possible even now with some adjustments. The alternative is as was previous suggested, application mounted only on demand. I know that is the way they work now, but with the way the memory system works there is just way to much lag.
Only when these OTHER Distros can achive this will there really be any competition to Puppy. I think that those who have used both know that.
I havent done alot of research but there is something called "accelerated Knoppix", but I think it is sort of like a remaster on a different medium, whether good or not, useful or not, it might be of interest to some if just to determine what is not useful. Currently I have no opinion or thoughts on it.
########################################
-
Mic67
There really is a limit to how small and useful Puppy can really be. I choose puppy essentially based on it size and usefulness. DLS is really based on size alone when I tried it, and it may be useful to some, but certainly not as familar or useful as Puppy.
Yep I believe Puppy is meant to boot from the CD. That is the most significant advantage of Puppy as every reboot is a fresh OS - you or anyone else can do anything to the OS and if it is not desirable then a simple reboot is a fresh OS. Not a multi-hour HD reinstall.
Perfect for newbies and those interesting in learning more about linux, and the security aspect is ultimate.
Actually what I am suggesting is allowing the user to control the system resources. Bloat is that which uses resources that are unnecessary or unwanted and are unused but mounted, that is bloat. I dont use puppy as a server, for samba, for an email client, any remote desktop control, etc.
It sure looks to me that Barry is maintaining this Distro and it usability is from boot. To me what Barry put out is the Offical Distro and any variants such as Muppy and Rudy are the offspring of that.
In a full CD in the way I have suggested is not bloat by any means, in fact it is the total opposite but with more control of system resources and useability or desirability of applications.
In fact what you are suggesting is bloat or having someone decide what deluxe is or ought to be regardless of what the users needs or wants are. What I am suggesting is control of system resources by the user without imposing anything that someone considers necessary or deluxe beyone what it would take to load applications on demand. If the whole contents is not mounted how could that be considered bloat? And only that which suits every individual user. If you never use or need samba why have it consume system resources or create vunerabilities by having it mounted. But if one day you do, just call up the app and mount it.
If fact what I believe I am suggesting is continuing the lead. If the other distros take the approach I am suggesting, what advantage will puppy have? Size is only relative to what is mounted and the system resources it uses. Size as related to what is on a CD is (becomes) really irrelevant.
If everyone who needed or wanted a house had to build it themselves....in response to "lead the way".
With the options available in Puppy - what exists is good enough -amazing in fact and practice. But if you are interested in the possibilites of the evolutions of the Live CD, then what? Offer an alternative that gives the best of Puppy without limitations, also and by allowing the user to actually control the resources their sytem uses. You really havent provided any. Your deluxe may very well not be mine. But my suggestion provides a custom deluxe for every users in just about every way.
#########################
Yep I believe Puppy is meant to boot from the CD. That is the most significant advantage of Puppy as every reboot is a fresh OS - you or anyone else can do anything to the OS and if it is not desirable then a simple reboot is a fresh OS. Not a multi-hour HD reinstall.
Perfect for newbies and those interesting in learning more about linux, and the security aspect is ultimate.
Actually what I am suggesting is allowing the user to control the system resources. Bloat is that which uses resources that are unnecessary or unwanted and are unused but mounted, that is bloat. I dont use puppy as a server, for samba, for an email client, any remote desktop control, etc.
It sure looks to me that Barry is maintaining this Distro and it usability is from boot. To me what Barry put out is the Offical Distro and any variants such as Muppy and Rudy are the offspring of that.
In a full CD in the way I have suggested is not bloat by any means, in fact it is the total opposite but with more control of system resources and useability or desirability of applications.
In fact what you are suggesting is bloat or having someone decide what deluxe is or ought to be regardless of what the users needs or wants are. What I am suggesting is control of system resources by the user without imposing anything that someone considers necessary or deluxe beyone what it would take to load applications on demand. If the whole contents is not mounted how could that be considered bloat? And only that which suits every individual user. If you never use or need samba why have it consume system resources or create vunerabilities by having it mounted. But if one day you do, just call up the app and mount it.
If fact what I believe I am suggesting is continuing the lead. If the other distros take the approach I am suggesting, what advantage will puppy have? Size is only relative to what is mounted and the system resources it uses. Size as related to what is on a CD is (becomes) really irrelevant.
If everyone who needed or wanted a house had to build it themselves....in response to "lead the way".
With the options available in Puppy - what exists is good enough -amazing in fact and practice. But if you are interested in the possibilites of the evolutions of the Live CD, then what? Offer an alternative that gives the best of Puppy without limitations, also and by allowing the user to actually control the resources their sytem uses. You really havent provided any. Your deluxe may very well not be mine. But my suggestion provides a custom deluxe for every users in just about every way.
#########################
there's no reason that what you're talking about isn't possible within the framework i'm talking about.
barebones is a starting place. core is the optional default. deluxe is a big fat demo.
teenpup is in puppy terms a HUGE distro. almost half the size i'm proposing.
the ability to manage smaller-scale items isn't excluded from what i've talked about, but it is a way to make what you're talking about instantly scalable on a larger basis.
barebones is a starting place. core is the optional default. deluxe is a big fat demo.
teenpup is in puppy terms a HUGE distro. almost half the size i'm proposing.
the ability to manage smaller-scale items isn't excluded from what i've talked about, but it is a way to make what you're talking about instantly scalable on a larger basis.