Puppy is still thriving, thanks to a growing community of dedicated users and developers, but at its start, Puppy was Barry's creation, and most OS depending on one developer, or is a hobby project, is doomed to fail after five years or so. Case in point : Antergos.
Puppy has established a community of dedicated developers and users, while Antergos is discontinued.
Why?
Was Barry more open to other developers, to new ideas?
I think Puppy is too unlike any other OS to die, unique qualities make it a unique OS.
https://itsfoss.com/antergos-linux-disc ... ce+Blog%29
Antergos vs Puppy
-
Lobster
- Official Crustacean
- Posts: 15522
- Joined: Wed 04 May 2005, 06:06
- Location: Paradox Realm
- Contact:
Every Penguin is special.
In my distro hopping daze I tried Antegros. It worked for me. Arch is like Slackware (my first ever Linux) - hardcore penguin.
The reason I was using Puppy before version 1 is because it was the ONLY Linux that was radically different.
It ran as root. Just like Windows. It ran in ram, which made it faster than a Husky chasing a sausage or is that a greyhound tracking after a rabbit ...
Most importantly Barry was NOT rewriting the kernel (I think he may have sent in code at times - don't know that is beyond my antenna reach) BUT he was rewriting and simplifying many old established programs with bash script, resurrecting and improving efficient programs etc.
Puppy is the way an OS should be. Simple enough for stupid crustaceans, written by the smartest penguins available. I learned because of team Puppy who knew stuff sufficiently to explain it.
For example who ever explained why running a desktop as root is safe because we are NOT on a network except via Ethernet, cable, WiFi or modem (still in use). Well a few did ...
https://igurublog.wordpress.com/2010/01 ... -not-root/
