Difference Between Puppy & Ubuntu

For talk and support relating specifically to Puppy derivatives
Message
Author
User avatar
mickee
Posts: 207
Joined: Tue 08 Feb 2011, 14:59
Location: Saskatoon SK Canada, Gateway 5300 Laptop, 600MHz Celeron, 384MB RAM, lucid puppy 5.2 (Full Install)
Contact:

#41 Post by mickee »

nooby wrote:Lupu short for Lucid Puppy make use of the Ubuntu repo
and works best on rather modern computers...
I use Lupu 5.20 on my 12 year old 600MHz Celeron, with 384MB Ram with no issues
[img]http://i17.photobucket.com/albums/b68/The_Wizard_of_OZ/Lindows-NOT-1.jpg[/img]
Linux is [i][b]NOT[/b][/i] Windows. Doesn't [i][b]PRETEND[/b][/i] to be, Doesn't [i][b]WANT [/b][/i]to be; Don't try to [i][b]MAKE[/b][/i] it be.

User avatar
mickee
Posts: 207
Joined: Tue 08 Feb 2011, 14:59
Location: Saskatoon SK Canada, Gateway 5300 Laptop, 600MHz Celeron, 384MB RAM, lucid puppy 5.2 (Full Install)
Contact:

#42 Post by mickee »

37fleetwood wrote:I think it's funny how we tend to form camps around our favorites and can be a bit unfair in our criticism of the opposing camp, but really both Puppy and Ubuntu are amazing in what they offer and I tend to like to think of myself as in the anti-Windows camp.
37fleetwood. I am with you. I was looking for an alternate to Win7, and chose ubuntu. I was looking for an up to date OS for my old laptop and went with puppy, and am not disappointed. My partner uses my Win7 and I use ubuntu/puppy. (No time to teach him linux, LOL!)

Haven't tried Natty or Ocelot, and I think i will wait for a release that doesn't use Unity.. or can that be removed/disabled?
[img]http://i17.photobucket.com/albums/b68/The_Wizard_of_OZ/Lindows-NOT-1.jpg[/img]
Linux is [i][b]NOT[/b][/i] Windows. Doesn't [i][b]PRETEND[/b][/i] to be, Doesn't [i][b]WANT [/b][/i]to be; Don't try to [i][b]MAKE[/b][/i] it be.

User avatar
Aitch
Posts: 6518
Joined: Wed 04 Apr 2007, 15:57
Location: Chatham, Kent, UK

#43 Post by Aitch »

For those poor confused souls fooled by all the FUD/Further Confusion about Puppy being 'derived from *buntu'....here's the GNU/Linux timeline showing the origins and derivatives of just about every Linux to date
[There are a few omissions in the Puppy derivatives (52 has been quoted recently) and where's TXZ_PUP 4.5 - Joe, is it a Pup derivative or a Slackware derivative...either way, it's not up there!!]

NOWHERE IS PUPPY A *BUNTU (OR ANY OTHER OS) DERIVATIVE!!

http://futurist.se/gldt/wp-content/uplo ... dt1104.png

It's effin huge so I didn't make the link active :wink:

Aitch :)

User avatar
37fleetwood
Posts: 403
Joined: Fri 10 Aug 2007, 03:25

#44 Post by 37fleetwood »

mickee wrote:Haven't tried Natty or Ocelot, and I think i will wait for a release that doesn't use Unity.. or can that be removed/disabled?
I downloaded 11.04 and have played with it. Unity is a bit different but not terrible. you can log out and log back in with regular old Gnome like always.
it defaults to Gnome if your video card isn't up to it.
[color=darkblue][b]Thanks!
Scott 8) [/b][/color]
[color=darkblue][size=150]I'm a PC... Without Windows[/size][/color]

User avatar
37fleetwood
Posts: 403
Joined: Fri 10 Aug 2007, 03:25

#45 Post by 37fleetwood »

Aitch wrote:For those poor confused souls fooled by all the FUD/Further Confusion about Puppy being 'derived from *buntu'....here's the GNU/Linux timeline showing the origins and derivatives of just about every Linux to date
[There are a few omissions in the Puppy derivatives (52 has been quoted recently) and where's TXZ_PUP 4.5 - Joe, is it a Pup derivative or a Slackware derivative...either way, it's not up there!!]

NOWHERE IS PUPPY A *BUNTU (OR ANY OTHER OS) DERIVATIVE!!

http://futurist.se/gldt/wp-content/uplo ... dt1104.png

It's effin huge so I didn't make the link active :wink:

Aitch :)
I think some (if not all) of the confusion is caused by people not understanding the what it means that some puppies use Ubuntu Binaries. maybe someone better qualified than I am should explain what that means.
[color=darkblue][b]Thanks!
Scott 8) [/b][/color]
[color=darkblue][size=150]I'm a PC... Without Windows[/size][/color]

bugman

#46 Post by bugman »

Lobster wrote:Puppy used to undergo radical changes every 6 weeks.
Tsk tsk - the audacity of being radical . . .

Now it takes a little longer . . .
Yep we are still frisky! :D
i'm sorry to say this is one of the reasons i went to debian

an update every 1 or 2 years is often enough for me

years of win98 must have left me with some deep well of patience . . .

User avatar
[deXter]
Posts: 3
Joined: Thu 16 Apr 2009, 02:40

But isn't Puppy now based on Ubuntu?

#47 Post by [deXter] »

Hi all,

Coming back to Puppy after a few years away as I want to install it on my netbook. Now I keep reading that Puppy is "built against" Ubuntu and therefore it's binary compatible with it. Now I'm not sure exactly what it means as an end user:

- Can I run and install .deb files?
- Can I add an Ubuntu repository?
- Can I install the latest Ubuntu mainline kernel and/or other drivers/modules?
- Can I get apt-get onto Puppy?
- Are *all* Puppy derivatives based on Ubuntu now? If not, which ones aren't?

I'll be grateful if someone could provide the above details. Thanks for your time!

User avatar
l2ulinux
Posts: 140
Joined: Tue 25 Jan 2011, 13:40
Location: Blountstown, Fl.

Difference Between Puppy & Ubuntu

#48 Post by l2ulinux »

The reason I started this was because I read a review on PUPPY. Almost the first thing from the reviewer was how he compared PUPPY against UBUNTU. How if you are doing a review you discuss the good and bad of a release of Linux. To start with you can download Lupu-5.25 in 15 minutes are less about 130 MB. Natty around 700 MB, and there about hour plus to download.

I can download Puppy burn a LiveCD and load it up and the other still downloading. Time from start of download to running OS 30 minutes are less. Puppy is written and compiled to be a small platform. All programs do not always work perfect and the desktop look is not the finest, but again it was build that way. I use a 8 year old system to one that is two months old. I can run almost every release of Puppy 2.14 top 7 to Lupu-5.25. I find some work better than others on all my system. The total is 9 differ systems with each a differ CPU.

Myself I use Puppy, Debian, LinuxMint Debian and sometime Win7. Believe it are not I almost went to Ubuntu Natty until they went the way of Unity. Again I can run Debian on all my systems

Never found a Linux release I hated. Just SOME I LOVE and some I just like.

User avatar
sheepy
Posts: 233
Joined: Sat 07 May 2011, 03:26
Location: GA
Contact:

#49 Post by sheepy »

Bernie_by_the_Sea wrote:
sheepy wrote: Try running compiz effects in Puppy.
Try running a heavily DirectX-dependent 3D game in Wine on Knoppix or Puppy. Chances are, it will work half as often as it will in Ubuntu. I have gotten Aion, Shaiya, Talisman, both Left 4 Dead's, Black Ops, (I hate that game, btw) and Star Wars: Force Unleashed to all work flawlessly under Wine in Ubuntu. I've only had one or two 3D games fail to run under Wine in Ubuntu, while other distros never even have one work.
Well, I don't do games. I dislike Wine strongly and only use it for four minor programs in a sandbox-like compartment. I certainly don't do Direct-X which is one of the most dangerous components of Windows. So I have no personal experience with any of these.

The very existence of Wine proves the superiority of Windows. However, having said that, Wine is Wine. The same version of Wine should work exactly the same in Ubuntu, Knoppix and Puppy. According to the Wine developers there is no difference in how Wine works in various distros.

I find it more than curious that you would attempt to demonstrate the superiority of a Linux distro by how well it runs Windows programs. Odd. This is exactly the same as saying Ubuntu is better because it can run Microsoft Office under Wine better than any other distro.

Running compiz effects? Compiz with compiz effects is installed by default in Knoppix so I looked at it and played with it a bit. Not impressed. As far as Puppy goes, this is a matter of comparing a 120GB distro to a 650GB distro. I know my graphics card/driver can handle compiz with effects but this is a relatively large install for Puppy, at least 22MB and probably more. This is about a two-hour download for me on dialup so I don’t think it’s worth my time and effort to install it just to demonstrate how easy it is. I can’t see that I would ever have any use for it. However, I am certain that compiz effects can be run on Puppy as others have done it in the past.
>Doesn't do gaming
>no experience with it
>Uses dialup
problem exposed, rofl

Also, Wine on Puppy has a very old version of DX and has trouble with some 3d games.
And the fact that you just called Windows superior to Linux completely negates the legitimacy of anything you could possibly say. The only reason why we have Wine is because 90% of computers are Windows, so all the software is made for it.
Also -- going back to Ubuntu vs Puppy -- Puppy appears to only support up to 3gb of ram, and 4 processor cores.

How can you possibly speak so highly of Winblows, yet be all like, "hurr durrr, DirectX is gayy, derrpppp." How hypocritical.

It appears that you hate Ubuntu because it's popular and there are a lot of newfags who give other Linux users a bad name. I'll agree with you there, but it's utterly idiotic to say that Ubuntu is the worst Linux distro, or anywhere near the bottom of the barrel.
Stop being a hipster.
Last edited by sheepy on Mon 23 May 2011, 14:42, edited 2 times in total.

User avatar
sheepy
Posts: 233
Joined: Sat 07 May 2011, 03:26
Location: GA
Contact:

#50 Post by sheepy »

Bernie_by_the_Sea wrote:Debian now comes on five or six DVD's. How many DVD's does it take to hold Ubuntu? Name one specific task Ubuntu can do that Knoppix can't do... or that Puppy can't do.
Okay, what the f***. You advocate Debian's huge .iso file, then bash on Ubuntu because it's small, but then say these other -- even smaller -- distros [puppy] can do everything either one of them can do.

You're making obvious contradictions. You're a troll, and a good one, I might add. Either you're trolling, or just lacking a significant portion of your brain.
Bernie_by_the_Sea wrote:Ubuntu is certainly not the most commonly used Linux distro.
Troll. Detected.
Bernie_by_the_Sea wrote:There is no Linux distro that can do everything Windows can do. The drivers and apps just don't exist.
I have never failed to get a Windows app to run under Linux in either Wine or a VM.



Most importantly, you keep saying all Linux distros are the same and can all do the same thing, so by that logic, what makes Ubuntu so inferior? It should be the same as the rest, remember? Despite the fact that it's frequently updated, and tasks that would normally take hours in other distros can be done in seconds on Ubuntu.

User avatar
Béèm
Posts: 11763
Joined: Wed 22 Nov 2006, 00:47
Location: Brussels IBM Thinkpad R40, 256MB, 20GB, WiFi ipw2100. Frugal Lin'N'Win

#51 Post by Béèm »

Berny_by_the_Sea wrote:the superiority of Windows
This is really a stupid statement.
A buyer of a PC has almost no other choice then to by it with windows on it.
That doesn't prove superiority.
Microsoft with it's 'special marketing techniques' didn't leave much choice for the HW manufacturers and thus for the potential buyer.

It is well proven that the microsoft products are inferior when one thinks of vulnerability.

Also to run Windows PC's have to be bigger and bigger.
Not so the case for f.e. linux distro's like puppy.
Time savers:
Find packages in a snap and install using Puppy Package Manager (Menu).
[url=http://puppylinux.org/wikka/HomePage]Consult Wikka[/url]
Use peppyy's [url=http://wellminded.com/puppy/pupsearch.html]puppysearch[/url]

geo_c
Posts: 115
Joined: Mon 15 Nov 2010, 04:38

#52 Post by geo_c »

.

The main difference between Puppy and Ubuntu is portability.

10 years back when I finally realized that any OS is installed on a drive and should be able to migrate from machine to machine (like DOS used to be) then I realized that computing was going down hill. That is MS was selling OS's per machine. I didn't know about Linux (other than an occasional mention)

I tried Ubuntu 10.10 for awhile on an older machine and found it enlightening, but cumbersome, point and click, yet confusing, and always refusing me permission to do things (worse than windows)

When I discovered Puppy I knew I found it. Old style computing that gave me control over the machine again, and also with plenty of help screens explaining things like boot loaders. Ultimately I was able to learn more in 6 months of using Puppy then I learned in 15 years of using Windows or Ubuntu.

At present I have Puppy installed in at least 7 different drives.

I have a main laptop used for work
on it is a copy of ArtistX (UbuntuStudio 10.04)
and a copy of PuppyStudio3.3rt
I have remastered a live CD of PuppyStudio to my liking and have installed it on various USB drives and PC hard drives

I flip to ArtistX whenever I need a lot of extra applications (especially video). It also has advantages in hardware choice, such as choosing the default soundcard.

But the workhorse is Puppy. No need to back it up. If the hard drive in my laptap goes, just pop in one of my USB drives (or sticks) and it runs equally as fast. You can't beat that. And you have to appreciate Puppy Studio on the level that only applications that really function well are included. ArtistX has lots of video editors and only one (openshot) is really reliable (to my experience so far)

So both systems have advantages. The great thing about Linux systems is they can be used side by side so easily.

.

User avatar
Marcelo
Posts: 48
Joined: Tue 26 Apr 2011, 20:50

Re: Difference Between Puppy & Ubuntu

#53 Post by Marcelo »

l2ulinux wrote:Both Puppy and Ubuntu have a following, as evidenced by the many derivative distros that have arisen from both, such as MacPup, Muppy and Minipup ("puplets") for Puppy, and Xubuntu, Lubuntu, Kubuntu, and Masonux for Ubuntu Linux. However, Ubuntu, the most commonly used Linux distro, according to Distrowatch.com, will seem easier to use for most new users. Its appearance and graphical interface is more similar in function and style to a Windows operating system than Puppy's. Most new users will gravitate to Ubuntu, given this choice, unless older hardware dictates a slimmer operating system, in which case Puppy Linux would be a great choice
The differentiation between “new user

nooby
Posts: 10369
Joined: Sun 29 Jun 2008, 19:05
Location: SwedenEurope

#54 Post by nooby »

I don't agree at all.

Okay I maybe is not the typical user at all. But I fail to see Ubuntu as friendly or easy to use.

Extremely unfriendly and almost impossible to use. Linux Mint was more friendly and a bit easier.

SuperOS was very much more Friendly due to them already included what took month to learn to add to the Ubuntu install.

But only puppy allowed me to install without shrinking the partition and such.

Ubuntu wanted to do full install unless one used WUBI.

Wubi tended to break when Ubuntu wanted to do automatic upgrade.
One had to find the WUBI version of the upgrade instead.

Nope Ubuntu is only friendly for somebody accepting their way of doing things.

Puppy due to frugal install dual booting without any need for to do a partition and reusing the same partition that Ms Windows already are on was extemely easy to add to a WinXP. More difficult if one had Vista orWin7 but that works nowadays.

Ubuntu had nothing like that so it is not friendly at all. Very unfriendly.
I use Google Search on Puppy Forum
not an ideal solution though

User avatar
Aitch
Posts: 6518
Joined: Wed 04 Apr 2007, 15:57
Location: Chatham, Kent, UK

#55 Post by Aitch »

notsonooby's experience trumps again! :D

Good post, nooby! thanks

Aitch :)

User avatar
Marcelo
Posts: 48
Joined: Tue 26 Apr 2011, 20:50

#56 Post by Marcelo »

Nooby,

Linux Mint and SuperOS are both second generation Ubuntu. I liked Linux Mint a lot and noticed the couple of improvements over Ubuntu. The problem with it was that for my machine with 512mb RAM the main version (Gnome) was a little bit too heavy. In fact it was only because their Xfce version was delayed (the main Xfce developer's wife was hospitalized, I remember reading in their forum at the time) that I tried Xubuntu 10.10 instead, and liked it very much. I didn't try SuperOS, but by its using Unity 3D I guess it will be too heavy for a 512mb RAM machine, which is also my friend's machine memory. Thanks anyway for reminding me, I might advice my friend to try Linux Mint Xfce instead of Xubuntu, though in my experience the differences were not so big. I don't know about Linux Mint Xfce rolling on top of Debian, it appears to be very economic on resources which is very good, but I am afraid a rolling version might cause desalignments my friend will be at a lost to solve.

As for problems with dual booting, I don't have any experience with Xubuntu because I used it alone on my machine. Yet, I did have a not so pleasant experience with Puppy saving the pup_save to hard disk alongside with Windows on the NTFS (Windows) partition: http://www.murga-linux.com/puppy/viewtopic.php?t=68731. Anyway, for my friend this is not a problem because he wants to remove Windows and dedicate his machine to a Linux distro.

I did run into another problem with Puppy, trying to install an HP printer, for which Lucid 5.2.5 has not a suitable hplip driver and therefore cannot be installed in it: http://www.murga-linux.com/puppy/viewtopic.php?t=68776. This is why I moved to Wary 5.1.2 for which there is a suitable hplip driver. Later on rcrsn51 confirmed in a PM to me that this specific printer does need an hplip driver which at the moment was not available for Lucid 5.2.5.

All in all, in my short experience till now, I did have to invest more time and effort to learn and customize Puppy than I had to learn and customize Xubuntu. And this is what I mean when I say the Ubuntu operating systems are more friendly to new users than Puppy. The point is not flexibility (a typical a newcomer from Windows will not be sure what you mean by that - remastering your system? what?) but how easy it is to start using the system and go on using it over time.

I personally enjoy the learning, and at present I mostly enjoy the lightness and fastness of Puppy, and I know very well that both, lightness (flexibility too) and learning, are intrinsically related. But not everyone is into it. I tend to think most users want their computer to do what they usually do with a computer, not to learn the operating system or to create one of their own.

ICPUG
Posts: 1308
Joined: Mon 25 Jul 2005, 00:09
Location: UK

#57 Post by ICPUG »

Marcelo,

You are right when you say:

most users want their computer to do what they usually do with a computer, not to learn the operating system or to create one of their own.

However, you then say that they actually get this from Xubuntu.

My experience is you don't get this from ANY distro. At some point, be it Windows, Puppy, Xubuntu or whatever their computer will not do what they want it to do.

When this happens they will go to their geekie friend or a dealer. These guys HAVE to learn the operating system in order to help.

Now, the question becomes which operating system would I recommend that ensures I get them coming back to me as little as possible? I don't know Xubuntu so cannot say anything about that.

Up until recently I would have said Ubuntu was possibly a good way to go because of the large number of users and help available. Now, with their recent changes (Grub2, Unity interface before tablets are the norm) and more in the pipeline I am not so sure.

Puppy has its prolems but once a geek sets it up for someone I think they can go away and use it and you will get little comeback.

User avatar
rcrsn51
Posts: 13096
Joined: Tue 05 Sep 2006, 13:50
Location: Stratford, Ontario

#58 Post by rcrsn51 »

Marcelo wrote:I did run into another problem with Puppy, trying to install an HP printer, for which Lucid 5.2.5 has not a suitable hplip driver and therefore cannot be installed in it: http://www.murga-linux.com/puppy/viewtopic.php?t=68776. This is why I moved to Wary 5.1.2 for which there is a suitable hplip driver. Later on rcrsn51 confirmed in a PM to me that this specific printer does need an hplip driver which at the moment was not available for Lucid 5.2.5.
There are actually two choices for making your D1663 work in Lupu. Lluamco's full HPLIP print/scan package was always available here.

Or you can now use the printer-only hplip_print-3.11.5.pet from here.

User avatar
Aitch
Posts: 6518
Joined: Wed 04 Apr 2007, 15:57
Location: Chatham, Kent, UK

#59 Post by Aitch »

Marcelo wrote:I tend to think most users want their computer to do what they usually do with a computer, not to learn the operating system or to create one of their own.
I think most people getting into PCs thought that about windoze, too - but, boy, were we sucker-punched! :wink: :lol:

I still see a comparison betwwen Puppy and any of the buntus as being a chalk and cheese exercise, as buntu seems more like windoze now than windoze ......

However, I do like 525> :D

Aitch :)

tlcstat
Posts: 87
Joined: Mon 29 Oct 2007, 00:56
Location: SW Virginia mountains

#60 Post by tlcstat »

Greetings,
I got started in Linux with Puppy a couple of years ago. Have to say I use Ubuntu Natty as my regular Distro. I'm just a guy that needs Bluetooth to enjoy life. Fluppy has a rudimentary bluetooth working but that's about all I have found. Every Ubuntu I've used has bluetooth. Without proper interface to the outside world I don't get the point of having a computer.
tlcstat

Post Reply