(old)Puppy Linux Discussion Forum

New Precise video from Sneekylinux.......

http://youtu.be/Y_KeVAisKjs

.

Think about why you would change it if it works.

Puppy Linux's interface is really solid and basically always works.

Ubuntu's Unity sucks, gnome3 is worse, and kde is really heavy.

Comparing LXDE or xfce which of these would be less heavy?
Which would you prefer even if bigger or slower due to appearance?

What about that enlighten17 whatever name it has. Buddhapup or similar.
I have some early dementia all names just disappear. Runt something.

.

Puppy's "competition" is bloated software and wasted CPU cycles.

I don't run Puppy to be "cool" and I don't run it to get "eye-candy stuff, animations, desktop cubes..."--none of which counts as "functionality" in my book. I run Puppy to actually get stuff done.

I see no reason why I or any other Puppy user should care what Distrowatch or the "cool kids" think. This is not junior high. Just my 2 pence.

What about the big changes under the hood? Surely that's more important than changes to UI? As many have stated, Puppy "just works". The fact that so many years have been devoted to under-the-hood funtionality speaks volumes. Can you name another distribution with as good winmodem support? Perhaps there is a very small number of winmodem users in the world, but the fact that this support exists in the form of Wary/Precise is extraordinary. It is meaningful choice within the Linux community.

simargl wrote:I feel like sneekylinux started repeating same Puppy reviews over and over again, probably because Puppy does not change -> see version 2.16 screenshot bellow. Now think about what changed in other distributions and desktop environments (Ubuntu, KDE, Gnome...) for that time

http://distrowatch.com/table.php?distribution=puppy
2007/08/04
2.17.1

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/c ... x-2.16.png

i feel that sneekylinux needs to stop whipping his tongue around when he speaks , really hard to understand...