Hi guys, here a few thoughts:
1) Seamonky OUT, Firefox + flashplayer IN its lightyears ahead of Seamonky. It also doesn't have to be really alot bigger example: Slitaz.
2) For heaven sake, enable SMP support or make 3 different releases, 1 for old hardware, 1 for recent and 1 for cutting edge standard.
3) In a cutting edge version the choise between Vesa and Xorg should be ditched so there would only be 1 and thats Xorg.
4) Explain wy people with radion or nvidia have to install their drivers ?
Can't Puppy just be smart enough to figur out what hardware is used fetch the corresponding screen drivers and install them ?
This also would eleminate the recompiling and putting up pets for 20 different kernel releases.
5) People have tons of M$ software / games and i wonder wy Wine can't be a standard part of the OS, its good, its mature and well worth the space, that brings me to filetypes.
6) The implementation of filetypes is not complete example: when i click
a link on shoutcast it is obvious that i want the stream to play, yet there are players used that can't pipe, same goes for bittorrent when i click a link it has no clue as to what to do with it were i just want to download a file even when i tell the browser wich app i want to open it with , it will not start the download.
7) While many people use laptops noone is doing anything in terms of CPU scaling were it should be a standard part of any OS, here goes basicly the same as for filetypes. One may argue that its easy to load a few modules and start CPU scaling but the OS should again recognize what hardware would be used and load the drivers for it then a VERY simplistic propgram could be used (eventually with a gfx interface) to set the scaling governor or cpu speed (something like E17 has in the taskbar).
This post is i no way intended to put puppy down i think puppy is great you only asked how to make a next release better and i posted some ideas, i thought out loud as a figur of speech. You asked how to make it better so i say: make it smarter.
greetz
Caved
Smarter
-
jamesjeffries2
- Posts: 196
- Joined: Mon 28 Apr 2008, 00:50
1. ongoing argument with good points from both sides. one of the reasons is that seamonkey is really small and also includes a mail client and a few other bits and pieces. to have both firefox and thunderbird or something would increase the size substantially. I've also found firefox to be unuseably slow on very old machines
2. agreed
3. think its in there to work with older hardware again
4. the radion and nvidia drivers are propritery so cant be distributed witht he OS, its the same with big OS's like ubuntu. But they can be downloaded easily enough. perhaps having something to prompt to download would be useful.
5. again arguments both ways, for a lot of people linux is there primary OS and they have little or no need for wine. and for new users it can be a little tricky to get working sometimes
6. agreed - there is a rox right click handler pet somewhere which is pretty good and might be able to help with this problem. might write something to help file type handling in mozilla
7. might be nice for it to be built in, have a look at this if your struggling with how to do it - http://www.murga-linux.com/puppy/viewtopic.php?t=28443
Some good points there, and i believe in addition to my comments there are several puplets out there which provide most of these things.
Part of the reason that some of this stuff is unimplemented is to avoid bloat, a lot of puppy fans like the small size and would prefer to keep it that way. Some of the afore mentioned puplets are a bit bigger because they include things like this.
Nice thinking though CavedOOde,
An interesting starting point for a discussion,
Jim
2. agreed
3. think its in there to work with older hardware again
4. the radion and nvidia drivers are propritery so cant be distributed witht he OS, its the same with big OS's like ubuntu. But they can be downloaded easily enough. perhaps having something to prompt to download would be useful.
5. again arguments both ways, for a lot of people linux is there primary OS and they have little or no need for wine. and for new users it can be a little tricky to get working sometimes
6. agreed - there is a rox right click handler pet somewhere which is pretty good and might be able to help with this problem. might write something to help file type handling in mozilla
7. might be nice for it to be built in, have a look at this if your struggling with how to do it - http://www.murga-linux.com/puppy/viewtopic.php?t=28443
Some good points there, and i believe in addition to my comments there are several puplets out there which provide most of these things.
Part of the reason that some of this stuff is unimplemented is to avoid bloat, a lot of puppy fans like the small size and would prefer to keep it that way. Some of the afore mentioned puplets are a bit bigger because they include things like this.
Nice thinking though CavedOOde,
An interesting starting point for a discussion,
Jim
-
belfasteddie
- Posts: 122
- Joined: Wed 11 Mar 2009, 09:13
Nvidia drivers.
Jamesjeffries2.
Your point #4. I think is somewhat invalid. I think Puppy is great except for the above. Slitaz 2.0 has them loaded . And from looking at the Slitaz files they seem to be very similiar to Puppy. So the question begs, if slitaz can ?
Your point #4. I think is somewhat invalid. I think Puppy is great except for the above. Slitaz 2.0 has them loaded . And from looking at the Slitaz files they seem to be very similiar to Puppy. So the question begs, if slitaz can ?
Hallos jamesjeffries2
I think people with decent hardware get a bit discriminated in favour of old machines don't you? (I will probebly get the comment that i should install a bloated distro here)
Greetz
Caved
This mindset is wrong, i understand that you want to prevent it from becomming bloated. What i don't understand is wy all this happens at the cost of functionality and usuability. What i also find amusing is the fact that you are talking about bloat (a few kb or mb) while the usuall Joe pc enthusiast has 2 TB off diskspace, a 2 or more core and about 3GB of ram. (NOT saying that you have to put useless junk into Puppy) THATS wy i was saying that there would be room for a cutting edge version of puppy, or are you saying that people with new machines shouldn't run puppy? Consider that even a 400 E vista laptop has these kinds of specs.Part of the reason that some of this stuff is unimplemented is to avoid bloat, a lot of puppy fans like the small size and would prefer to keep it that way. Some of the afore mentioned puplets are a bit bigger because they include things like this.
I think people with decent hardware get a bit discriminated in favour of old machines don't you? (I will probebly get the comment that i should install a bloated distro here)
Here is the perfect example: trimming bloat (that isnt really bloat) and killing alot of functionality (for not so old machines) in favour of it.to have both firefox and thunderbird or something would increase the size substantially. I've also found firefox to be unuseably slow on very old machines.
Do you think that people jump into Linux from nothing? I dare to say that 80% of the people who even install Linux worked with windows before(or still do). Therefore chances are that they own windows apps and / or games that they want to just play and use, logical. I have used Linux for ages but i also got tons of windows apps / games. Again alot of functionality, usuability and fun lost to a few MB of space gain. Not tricky btw click an .exe and it will run.again arguments both ways, for a lot of people linux is there primary OS and they have little or no need for wine. and for new users it can be a little tricky
I know how to use CPU Scaling thats not the point , the point is that something like this has to be part of any OS (2009)might be nice for it to be built in, have a look at this if your struggling with how to do it
Puplets are a wonderfull thing, same as the frugal concept and are the reason i like puppy so much... Not for its smallness (i don't care about a few mb =P )Part of the reason that some of this stuff is unimplemented is to avoid bloat, a lot of puppy fans like the small size and would prefer to keep it that way. Some of the afore mentioned puplets are a bit bigger because they include things like this.
Greetz
Caved
-
jamesjeffries2
- Posts: 196
- Joined: Mon 28 Apr 2008, 00:50
@belfasteddie your right, not sure where i got that idea from.
I personaly have a 500mhz, 128mb pc with no hdd, and a laptop at 1.73ghz, 2gb,40gb. For the older one i use standard puppy, for the newer one i use my own version of puppy with plenty of bigger features in.
There are of course people who run puppy on newer machines and your point about perhaps having a concurrent version that was aimed at these people is a good one.
@CavedOOde2.1.1, SOFTWARE designed exclusively for use on the Linux or FreeBSD operating systems, or Open Solaris or other operating systems derived from the source code to these operating systems, may be copied and redistributed, provided that the binary files thereof are not modified.
I see what your saying but a theres a couple of threads about what typ eof heardware puppy is used on and its mostly low end older pc's.What i also find amusing is the fact that you are talking about bloat (a few kb or mb) while the usuall Joe pc enthusiast has 2 TB off diskspace, a 2 or more core and about 3GB of ram
I personaly have a 500mhz, 128mb pc with no hdd, and a laptop at 1.73ghz, 2gb,40gb. For the older one i use standard puppy, for the newer one i use my own version of puppy with plenty of bigger features in.
There are of course people who run puppy on newer machines and your point about perhaps having a concurrent version that was aimed at these people is a good one.
Great post CavedOOde, thank you for coming on here and giving us you views. You will need to excuse our developers, many of them do not get out much.
Im working on getting a fully functional firefox with flash player/java included in the installer on the desktop, then it should only be a few clicks away. for now you can install ut via the forums. When its tested I shall make the request. Same with open office.
Yes puppy should do a lot more things intuitively (acceleration etc), and can do this without having to be big...just have the scripts to load them automatically if there required.
Filetypes need work too.
Feel free to help out on any of things that trouble (were all volunteers), that way Puppy gets even better.
Im working on getting a fully functional firefox with flash player/java included in the installer on the desktop, then it should only be a few clicks away. for now you can install ut via the forums. When its tested I shall make the request. Same with open office.
Yes puppy should do a lot more things intuitively (acceleration etc), and can do this without having to be big...just have the scripts to load them automatically if there required.
Filetypes need work too.
Feel free to help out on any of things that trouble (were all volunteers), that way Puppy gets even better.
Puppy Linux's [url=http://www.murga-linux.com/puppy/viewtopic.php?p=296352#296352]Mission[/url]
Sorry, my server is down atm!
Sorry, my server is down atm!
Please make it smarter, so I don't have to be.
If you build it they will come!
I also hope you will increase Puppy's usage by making it more friendly to users who have no understand of programing.
1-The Power User Who understands and uses advanced features on their computer, regardless of their hardware.
2-The Basic User who only uses the basic functions on their computer and has no idea what kind of hardware they have.
Want Puppy to move to the top of the Linux chart?
Make version 5 with User friendly flavors to function out of the box.
Power geeks will always have the option to make their own version.
I am a non-geek who has decided I am done with the hassles of Bill's product.
I have looked at other Linux types but I have to say that Puppy was by far the easiest to start up.
However, I see many places for improvement.
A Geek thinks about how to create a program to do xyz. When they succeed they are happy. There are lots of ways a
program can be configured to do xyz.
The User on the other hand, wants xyz to work without great effort on their part.
That includes without a large learning curve.
There are much fewer ways xyz can be configured to do that.
Puppy's goal as I understand it, is to met the needs of the user with a small program on any hardware.
One of the realities of working with users is: the majority already have a basic understanding of how Windose or Apple works.
The success of any Linux user interface will be to capitalize on that understanding and then [
b]gently take the user in an new direction. [/b] If a program lets a user start with what he already knows,
the user will be comfortable in moving in a new direction along with it.
The live setup of puppy is very good. It was based on what I already understood about windose.
Let's now work on making each function on puppy that easy.
Pete22
Hoping to be a Puppy Power User
.
If old hardware is what puppy caters to: then It will always be the majority of its users.jamesjeffries2 wrote:....what type of hardware puppy is used on and its mostly low end older pc's.
I agree. Cutting Edge Linux Users are currently looking elsewhere for a product that will work out of the box.jamesjeffries2 wrote:There are of course people who run puppy on newer machines and your point about perhaps having a concurrent version that was aimed at these people is a good one.
If you build it they will come!
I also hope you will increase Puppy's usage by making it more friendly to users who have no understand of programing.
1-The Power User Who understands and uses advanced features on their computer, regardless of their hardware.
2-The Basic User who only uses the basic functions on their computer and has no idea what kind of hardware they have.
Want Puppy to move to the top of the Linux chart?
Make version 5 with User friendly flavors to function out of the box.
Power geeks will always have the option to make their own version.
I am a non-geek who has decided I am done with the hassles of Bill's product.
I have looked at other Linux types but I have to say that Puppy was by far the easiest to start up.
However, I see many places for improvement.
A Geek thinks about how to create a program to do xyz. When they succeed they are happy. There are lots of ways a
program can be configured to do xyz.
The User on the other hand, wants xyz to work without great effort on their part.
That includes without a large learning curve.
There are much fewer ways xyz can be configured to do that.
Puppy's goal as I understand it, is to met the needs of the user with a small program on any hardware.
One of the realities of working with users is: the majority already have a basic understanding of how Windose or Apple works.
The success of any Linux user interface will be to capitalize on that understanding and then [
b]gently take the user in an new direction. [/b] If a program lets a user start with what he already knows,
the user will be comfortable in moving in a new direction along with it.
The live setup of puppy is very good. It was based on what I already understood about windose.
Let's now work on making each function on puppy that easy.
Pete22
Hoping to be a Puppy Power User
.
Please make it smarter, so I don't have to be.
I believe that should be a goal that puppy's "mission" should embrace...
All these "bugfix releases" can get frustrating in trying to keep up. I think there HAS to be an easier way!
Why not develope an app that will keep your puppy updated with the latest bugfixes that are in a central repository. Linux Mint does it seamlessly. That way, no one has to compile a new release, or wait for an appropriate amount of bugs to be reported...and new linux users don't have to dig through pages n pages on the forums trying to find what will fix abiword or any other program. This will also allow developers to concentrate their efforts in other ares, to advance Puppy even further!. For example...Ttuuxxx took the time to create 3 bugfix releases, when this wouldn't be necessary if we could simply update the release we have installed. An old saying comes to mind...work smarter, not harder.
I also hope the puppy developers will make "woof" or puppy 5...a LTS version! There shouldn't be a need to change kernels with each standard release. (When there are a multitude of releases in a 12 month period.) All this does is break program compatibility and frustrate the newbie user. I know this IS possible, as there are other distros that have the ability to run newer apps, without creating a whole new release.
Puppy comes bundled with some programs that on the surface, look great for the casual user. The problem is...some of these programs...cause memory leaks. It's irritating to have to use pprocess to kill off pfind...only to have pprocess not exit cleanly! If you have GIGS of ram, that probably isn't an issue... But not all of us have that abundance, and need to milk every kb we have. Mind you, I'm not knocking the programming of these apps, merely the buggy language used to implement them. Ttuuxxx is making strides in finding replacements for these programs, and I believe serious consideration should be given to using his work or finding other alternatives.
Puppy is a great little distro to play with, I use it instead of my Mint install to play linux native open source games. I've also turned my relatives onto Puppy Fire Hydrant (by Ttuuxxx) and PCPuppyOS (by pizzasgood, I believe) And they're rock solid. Thank you both for greatly diminishing troubleshooting time spent over the phone to almost nill. Unfortunately, I can't say the same for releases beyond Dingo 4.
I feel, if you want Puppy to be a distro for the masses, and to bring more folks over from windows...then there must be some real thought by the developers. Prescribe to the KISS method (keep it simple stupid) If you're going to keep the 100MB limit and maintain usability and stability, cut out things like pwidgets and other "bling" and use that space for rock solid and memory leak free programs. And for those who want all the pretty desktop stuff, make em simple addons or upgrades. Please remember, not all of us are experts...we just want a solid OS that works, with minimal fuss.
I believe that should be a goal that puppy's "mission" should embrace...
All these "bugfix releases" can get frustrating in trying to keep up. I think there HAS to be an easier way!
Why not develope an app that will keep your puppy updated with the latest bugfixes that are in a central repository. Linux Mint does it seamlessly. That way, no one has to compile a new release, or wait for an appropriate amount of bugs to be reported...and new linux users don't have to dig through pages n pages on the forums trying to find what will fix abiword or any other program. This will also allow developers to concentrate their efforts in other ares, to advance Puppy even further!. For example...Ttuuxxx took the time to create 3 bugfix releases, when this wouldn't be necessary if we could simply update the release we have installed. An old saying comes to mind...work smarter, not harder.
I also hope the puppy developers will make "woof" or puppy 5...a LTS version! There shouldn't be a need to change kernels with each standard release. (When there are a multitude of releases in a 12 month period.) All this does is break program compatibility and frustrate the newbie user. I know this IS possible, as there are other distros that have the ability to run newer apps, without creating a whole new release.
Puppy comes bundled with some programs that on the surface, look great for the casual user. The problem is...some of these programs...cause memory leaks. It's irritating to have to use pprocess to kill off pfind...only to have pprocess not exit cleanly! If you have GIGS of ram, that probably isn't an issue... But not all of us have that abundance, and need to milk every kb we have. Mind you, I'm not knocking the programming of these apps, merely the buggy language used to implement them. Ttuuxxx is making strides in finding replacements for these programs, and I believe serious consideration should be given to using his work or finding other alternatives.
Puppy is a great little distro to play with, I use it instead of my Mint install to play linux native open source games. I've also turned my relatives onto Puppy Fire Hydrant (by Ttuuxxx) and PCPuppyOS (by pizzasgood, I believe) And they're rock solid. Thank you both for greatly diminishing troubleshooting time spent over the phone to almost nill. Unfortunately, I can't say the same for releases beyond Dingo 4.
I feel, if you want Puppy to be a distro for the masses, and to bring more folks over from windows...then there must be some real thought by the developers. Prescribe to the KISS method (keep it simple stupid) If you're going to keep the 100MB limit and maintain usability and stability, cut out things like pwidgets and other "bling" and use that space for rock solid and memory leak free programs. And for those who want all the pretty desktop stuff, make em simple addons or upgrades. Please remember, not all of us are experts...we just want a solid OS that works, with minimal fuss.
Hello, SSIXS
I agree with you everything you said.
And CavedOOde
I especially like the number 5
"5) People have tons of M$ software / games and i wonder wy Wine can't be a standard part of the OS, its good, its mature and well worth the space, that brings me to filetypes."
The idea behind Woof is that it will utilize other solid repositories such as Slackware or Ubuntu or Debian.
But the biggest repository is windows applications. Not all of them are commercial. Freely available thru sites like CNet etc.
Why reinvent the wheel.? Most of us have one or two favorite windows applications. If we cannot use them, it is impossible to become linux converts.
John S
I agree with you everything you said.
And CavedOOde
I especially like the number 5
"5) People have tons of M$ software / games and i wonder wy Wine can't be a standard part of the OS, its good, its mature and well worth the space, that brings me to filetypes."
The idea behind Woof is that it will utilize other solid repositories such as Slackware or Ubuntu or Debian.
But the biggest repository is windows applications. Not all of them are commercial. Freely available thru sites like CNet etc.
Why reinvent the wheel.? Most of us have one or two favorite windows applications. If we cannot use them, it is impossible to become linux converts.
John S