(old)Puppy Linux Discussion Forum

RetroTechGuy wrote:...head the nail right on the head...

Funny. Seems English might not be your native language either.

RetroTechGuy,
Did I mention that you’re sounding like a sycophant more and more every day?

jonyo wrote:users can also abandon ship at any time for whatever reason, it's the beauty and reality of having options

Exactly. It's a "free market" system, from both ends (the devs, and the usrs).

One way to measure success of a product (albeit a product that is no cost to the user) is the number of people using that product. Puppy has done quite well in that regard.

People are always talking about DistroWatch, but when looking at usage, one should keep in mind that there are a number of Puppy versions are on the list, competing with each other... So the Puppy family is quite large, even next to "the big boys"...

Why? IMO, it's because it's small, fast to boot, low system requirements, and generally works right out of the box... Add to that, that it can be frugally installed (I need not commit my machine to a single full version of Linux, but can play with many OS), and you have a winner...

puppyite wrote:

RetroTechGuy wrote:...head the nail right on the head...

Funny. Seems English might not be your native language either.

Poor Puppyite, you're now reduced to grammar flames...

users are the foundation of a distro, watch what you ask for

puppyite wrote:RetroTechGuy,
Did I mention that you’re sounding like a sycophant more and more every day?

Oh my, what shall I do?... Puppyite is not happy with me...

jonyo wrote:users are the foundation of a distro, watch what you ask for

My feeling is that Puppy is in no real danger from "the big boys", if that's what you meant. From what I've seen, the newer versions of those are pretty hardware intensive. Puppy generally plays in a different market, to a different target audience.

My observation is that running one of "the big boys" is often more a case of OS snobbery, than actual OS utility. That is, often users who do little more than browse the web, send email, and write an occasional document -- they could trivially do all of that with Puppy, and much more.

RetroTechGuy wrote:

puppyite wrote:

RetroTechGuy wrote:...head the nail right on the head...

Funny. Seems English might not be your native language either.

Poor Puppyite, you're now reduced to grammar flames...

It’s spelling not grammar (head instead of hit).

this was then
http://puppylinux.com/development/project-statement.htm
having fun with pup has its limits

Say what Barry?: “There is no committee, no inner-circle.

Just chirping in on the new main topic of this thread: grammar and spelling - what about punctuation ?
Cheers / MHHP

puppyite wrote:

8-bit wrote:

puppyite wrote:8-bit,
Just to be clear, your post does not apply to me.

I was not pointing fingers at anyone!

OK. I just wanted to make it clear that I have not approached any developers with demands.

I also know that by you having a website that supports Puppy, you are helping out.
To give you a problem I have with helping out with donations to support the costs of maintaining sites for Puppy and also donations to BK, I do not have any type of internet money transfer.
So how do I give funds that I am reasonably sure will arrive where they are supposed to?

If you have PayPal see this thread about donating to Barry.

The donate button is on the right just down from the top on this page.

I tried to putting a direct link to Barry’s donate button in this post but it times out so no joy there.

If you’re offering to donate money to me thank you very kindly however I don’t have a donate button on the Puppy Linux FAQ. If ever I do I’ll let you know.

If you can’t use PayPal I did a search for “internet money transfer

[quote="puppyite"]Say what Barry?: “There is no committee, no inner-circle.

You foreigners have no sense of humor whatsoever.

[quote="RetroTechGuy"][quote="puppyite"]Say what Barry?: “There is no committee, no inner-circle.

puppyite wrote:You foreigners have no sense of humor whatsoever.

No sense of humour at all. Therefore, I might have missed how funny a bloke you really are .

OTOH, foreigners foreign to what???

/MHHP

RetroTechGuy wrote:People are always talking about DistroWatch, but when looking at usage, one should keep in mind that there are a number of Puppy versions are on the list, competing with each other... So the Puppy family is quite large, even next to "the big boys"...

people are always talking about distrowatch, but one should keep in mind that distrowatch only records page visits, not actual usage of any distro

Here Barry says: “The choice of which distro's packages are used is not really up to me.

RetroTechGuy wrote:
People are always talking about DistroWatch, but when looking at usage, one should keep in mind that there are a number of Puppy versions are on the list, competing with each other... So the Puppy family is quite large, even next to "the big boys"...

Why? IMO, it's because it's small, fast to boot, low system requirements, and generally works right out of the box... Add to that, that it can be frugally installed (I need not commit my machine to a single full version of Linux, but can play with many OS), and you have a winner...

i would say ~ generally being the key word yes

RetroTechGuy wrote:

jonyo wrote:users are the foundation of a distro, watch what you ask for

My feeling is that Puppy is in no real danger from "the big boys", if that's what you meant. From what I've seen, the newer versions of those are pretty hardware intensive. Puppy generally plays in a different market, to a different target audience.

My observation is that running one of "the big boys" is often more a case of OS snobbery, than actual OS utility. That is, often users who do little more than browse the web, send email, and write an occasional document -- they could trivially do all of that with Puppy, and much more.

i mean a distro is at the whim of users period

jonyo wrote:well ..more recently we have this
http://puppylib.open-lib.net/puppy.html

Who owns Puppy?

We all do. Puppy is covered by the LGPL license, an open source license.

The older link (http://puppylinux.com/development/project-statement.htm) also notes:

Legal issues
Concerning the licencing of Puppy. Puppy is GPL, and has been for sometime. Awhile back, I went through all my scripts and made sure that they all had GPL notices in them. There are some closed-source but free apps in Puppy, such as Opera and the Flash-player, which is quite legitimate. The actual name "Puppy Linux" and my logos are copyrighted to me, which is also legitimate -- that is, does not contravene in any way the GPL licences of the applications in Puppy, or the overall "freeness" of the Puppy-project

So there's no change from that aspect...