Puppy 4.2 Bling Or No Bling ANNONYMOUS POLL

News, happenings
Message
Author
User avatar
droope
Posts: 801
Joined: Fri 01 Aug 2008, 00:17
Location: Uruguay, Mercedes

#16 Post by droope »

01micko wrote:
bugman wrote:i like it simple

[i've already said too much]
Not enough
I realize there has been a lot of effort put into Pwidgets, and if it's not added it probably will be used a lot less.

But it should NOT, in my opinion be activated at a start. Perhaps already isntalled, but not activated at a start.


I am not aware of the size of Pwidgets, what is it?

User avatar
ttuuxxx
Posts: 11171
Joined: Sat 05 May 2007, 10:00
Location: Ontario Canada,Sydney Australia
Contact:

#17 Post by ttuuxxx »

last count 503kb compressed pet, for all 4 packages (conky included), you need to also remember that one of the its also the new icon switcher that has all those 133 system links in root/my applications also, Thats why I was thinking it would be great to have all that packaged up in one pet located at root, with a puppy pin to the package from the desktop, you click the icon, it installs, the new and a lot slower fixmenus script, icon switcher, pwidgets, conky, libidn, libxcb, startup shortcut, and any other addon script they have. If it was installed and turned off by default, we would still have the slower fixmenus, all the system links, installed, in a package we would have a choice. But I guess thats what puplets are for :)
ttuuxxx
http://audio.online-convert.com/ <-- excellent site
http://samples.mplayerhq.hu/A-codecs/ <-- Codec Test Files
http://html5games.com/ <-- excellent HTML5 games :)

User avatar
droope
Posts: 801
Joined: Fri 01 Aug 2008, 00:17
Location: Uruguay, Mercedes

#18 Post by droope »

ttuuxxx wrote:last count 503kb compressed pet, for all 4 packages (conky included), you need to also remember that one of the its also the new icon switcher that has all those 133 system links in root/my applications also, Thats why I was thinking it would be great to have all that packaged up in one pet located at root, with a puppy pin to the package from the desktop, you click the icon, it installs, the new and a lot slower fixmenus script, icon switcher, pwidgets, conky, libidn, libxcb, startup shortcut, and any other addon script they have. If it was installed and turned off by default, we would still have the slower fixmenus, all the system links, installed, in a package we would have a choice. But I guess thats what puplets are for :)
ttuuxxx
Is it really that much slower?

This is not a very politically correct thread, to say it in a manner. From the way you describe it, only 1 thing comes clear. You don't want it to be included.

Is it really that much of a drag? I mean, 503kb...

Perhaps it's buggy. right?



Maybe it can be added as an installed program, but with no widgets on the desktop... That'd be great for both parties.

User avatar
ttuuxxx
Posts: 11171
Joined: Sat 05 May 2007, 10:00
Location: Ontario Canada,Sydney Australia
Contact:

#19 Post by ttuuxxx »

droope wrote:
ttuuxxx wrote:last count 503kb compressed pet, for all 4 packages (conky included), you need to also remember that one of the its also the new icon switcher that has all those 133 system links in root/my applications also, Thats why I was thinking it would be great to have all that packaged up in one pet located at root, with a puppy pin to the package from the desktop, you click the icon, it installs, the new and a lot slower fixmenus script, icon switcher, pwidgets, conky, libidn, libxcb, startup shortcut, and any other addon script they have. If it was installed and turned off by default, we would still have the slower fixmenus, all the system links, installed, in a package we would have a choice. But I guess thats what puplets are for :)
ttuuxxx
Is it really that much slower?

This is not a very politically correct thread, to say it in a manner. From the way you describe it, only 1 thing comes clear. You don't want it to be included.

Is it really that much of a drag? I mean, 503kb...

Perhaps it's buggy. right?



Maybe it can be added as an installed program, but with no widgets on the desktop... That'd be great for both parties.
When it comes to bling I like it, when it comes to the look of Pwidgets, I love it, when it comes to my system resources and having a slower pc, I don't like it, Pwidgets is based on Conky, thats all and good, but Conky with a transparent background was always not made to run that way and slowed down your desktop somewhat, but Pwidgets is layering this, plus if you open Pprocess you have 3 pwidgets running and one xclock, if you add another widget you'll have another process running, once i had over 8 at once when I added a few features.
ttuuxxx
http://audio.online-convert.com/ <-- excellent site
http://samples.mplayerhq.hu/A-codecs/ <-- Codec Test Files
http://html5games.com/ <-- excellent HTML5 games :)

disciple
Posts: 6984
Joined: Sun 21 May 2006, 01:46
Location: Auckland, New Zealand

#20 Post by disciple »

but Conky with a transparent background was always not made to run that way and slowed down your desktop somewhat
Is that true for Torsmo too? No wonder I had such a problem with it back in the day...
Do you know a good gtkdialog program? Please post a link here

Classic Puppy quotes

ROOT FOREVER
GTK2 FOREVER

gerry
Posts: 986
Joined: Thu 26 Jul 2007, 21:49
Location: England

#21 Post by gerry »

As I said somewhere else, TOP shows that the widgets use a total of 14 percent of my 256MB ram, and it shows in speed.

Gerry

User avatar
ttuuxxx
Posts: 11171
Joined: Sat 05 May 2007, 10:00
Location: Ontario Canada,Sydney Australia
Contact:

#22 Post by ttuuxxx »

gerry wrote:As I said somewhere else, TOP shows that the widgets use a total of 14 percent of my 256MB ram, and it shows in speed.

Gerry
Yes thats hard to measure on my pc because I have 4gigs of ddr2, so it shows like 1%, but the average user will notice a change. I notice mostly with the dragging of the windows,compiling and fixmenus.
ttuuxxx
http://audio.online-convert.com/ <-- excellent site
http://samples.mplayerhq.hu/A-codecs/ <-- Codec Test Files
http://html5games.com/ <-- excellent HTML5 games :)

User avatar
droope
Posts: 801
Joined: Fri 01 Aug 2008, 00:17
Location: Uruguay, Mercedes

#23 Post by droope »

Then it's a definitive no from me, i guess.

bugman

#24 Post by bugman »

i tried pwidgets once and it seriously killed my computer

[now happily removed]

User avatar
trapster
Posts: 2117
Joined: Mon 28 Nov 2005, 23:14
Location: Maine, USA
Contact:

#25 Post by trapster »

Me likes my transparent Gkrellm.
I do use a slim down conky for a calendar, reminders and latest newsfeeds.
trapster
Maine, USA

Asus eeepc 1005HA PU1X-BK
Frugal install: Slacko
Currently using full install: DebianDog

User avatar
jhecht
Posts: 227
Joined: Sun 29 Jan 2006, 17:36
Location: New York City (Manhattan)
Contact:

less is WAY more...

#26 Post by jhecht »

What makes Puppy so outstanding is Barry K's effort toward lean, clean, and fast software - not only his own work, but what is chosen to include with each iteration of Puppy.

When we deviate from that mindset, we lose sight of the original design concept, and risk devolving into bloatware...

Think the Bauhaus school of design - or - since this is Puppy, perhaps Bowowhaus. 'Form follows function' - that which functions most cleanly and simply is most beautiful...
John Hechtman / www.zenarrow.com / jhecht@ix.netcom.com
"Computer help in NYC" / 917 628 0192 - cell / 212 586 4633 - landline

User avatar
ecomoney
Posts: 2178
Joined: Fri 25 Nov 2005, 07:00
Location: Lincolnshire, England
Contact:

#27 Post by ecomoney »

"Bling" vs Performance are not always mutially exclusive. Its possible to have something that doesnt look like Windows 3.1 but still runs very nearly as fast as the "3.1-looking" puppys.

Its not enough to have something that "just works", it has to be something that people are able to work easily, and that they actually want to work as well.

Pwidgets adds a lot of usability to puppy 4.1.2, at very little cost to performance. Im not sure about its long term inclusion in standard puppy linux, but I am glad that it was included in 4.2 just to show how attractive and useable puppy linux can be with a few extra tweaks.

I dont think the results of this poll should be taken seriously, as the Puppy Forum a lot more frequented by serious developers than end users. In my experience, a poll of everyone who had ever used puppy linux would show a very different result.
Puppy Linux's [url=http://www.murga-linux.com/puppy/viewtopic.php?p=296352#296352]Mission[/url]

Sorry, my server is down atm!

User avatar
jhecht
Posts: 227
Joined: Sun 29 Jan 2006, 17:36
Location: New York City (Manhattan)
Contact:

#28 Post by jhecht »

ecomoney wrote:"Bling" vs Performance are not always mutially exclusive. Its possible to have something that doesnt look like Windows 3.1 but still runs very nearly as fast as the "3.1-looking" puppys.

Its not enough to have something that "just works", it has to be something that people are able to work easily, and that they actually want to work as well.
You are imposing your own aesthetic judgments on others. I happen to >like< a minimalist look - why should more 'eye candy' be installed in a basic build, when it can easily be added as a .pet package? Or, if it is installed, it should be easily removable.
ecomoney wrote:Pwidgets adds a lot of usability to puppy 4.1.2, at very little cost to performance. Im not sure about its long term inclusion in standard puppy linux, but I am glad that it was included in 4.2 just to show how attractive and useable puppy linux can be with a few extra tweaks.

I dont think the results of this poll should be taken seriously, as the Puppy Forum a lot more frequented by serious developers than end users. In my experience, a poll of everyone who had ever used puppy linux would show a very different result.
I have not used Pwidgets, so I'm not able to judge it. However, this poll is being answered by Puppy users who care enough to do so. To say it should be ignored is once again, imposing your values on other Puppy users. And how do you propose to contact 'everyone who had ever used Puppy Linux'? Further, what 'experience' do you have that makes you think the results of an expanded poll would be different? You totally have the right to your own opinion - but so does everyone else...

In >my< experience, the most ardent Puppy users, are fluent computerists who want to get away from bloated OSs that include too much decoration. There is no reason to not offer whatever >add-ons< you like, to change appearance - but don't include them in the basic build.
John Hechtman / www.zenarrow.com / jhecht@ix.netcom.com
"Computer help in NYC" / 917 628 0192 - cell / 212 586 4633 - landline

User avatar
ecomoney
Posts: 2178
Joined: Fri 25 Nov 2005, 07:00
Location: Lincolnshire, England
Contact:

#29 Post by ecomoney »

Further, what 'experience' do you have that makes you think the results of an expanded poll would be different?
My experience is in using puppy linux, in head to head competition with windows computer engineers, full time as my primary "job" in my local community over the past five years, looking after the needs of individuals, family homes, small business, schools and charities. I ran a puppy Linux cybercafe for three years, and support around 150 p.c.'s in my local area.

http://www.murga-linux.com/puppy/viewtopic.php?t=12714
http://www.deoss.org/positive/index.php ... &Itemid=43
http://www.murga-linux.com/puppy/viewto ... 86&t=23459

I have an academic and practical background in Computer Programming and Business Computing using Windows for twelve years before that.
In >my< experience, the most ardent Puppy users, are fluent computerists
This may well be true, but only because Puppy Linux is currently at an underdeveloped state, and does not yet entirely fulfil the purpose for which it was created. Its mission statement (as stated by Barry Kauler, its origionator) says in its entirety
Puppy Linux Mission Statement:

* Puppy will easily install to USB, Zip or hard drive media
* Booting from CD, Puppy will load totally into RAM so that the CD drive is then free for other purposes
* Puppy will be extremely friendly for Linux newbies
* Puppy will boot up and run extraordinarily fast
* Puppy will have all the applications needed for daily use
* Puppy will just work, no hassles
* Puppy will breathe new life into old PCs
Only a tiny fraction of the people I have introduced to puppy linux have ever posted on this board. Generally speaking end users just dont, whatever operating system they use. If it goes wrong, or doesnt do everything they want it to, they just call an engineer. They dont answer polls on message boards.

From a technical perspective, I understand part of puppy linux's speed and "special powers" are derived from its small size. IMHO the fact that is has until now looked like (and I quote from the general public who I meet every day) an obsolete Windows OS, full of strange codes, with common tasks not being automated, has severely held back its uptake as a mainstream operating system. Its recent rise up the rankings at distrowatch are because its automated simple tasks like accessing cd's and pendrives, improved its appearance (slightly), gives warnings about full disks and because it no longer defaults to a black screen full of code if it is improperly shut down. These have required hardly any increase in size to achieve.

Like I say, I think it was a wise choice from whodo to include some extra "bling" in this release, just to show what is possible from any future puppy linux. It is much more usable to, and desired by, the average computer user (who it is aimed at) because of these extra small additions. I am sure his own personal experience in supporting puppy linux based p.c.'s in charities to average end users made him aware of the need for this.

I hope future editions of puppy will spare a few well chosen extra bytes (because thats all it would take) to make it look like a modern operating system, and a lot more suitable to the vast majority of people out their that dont have access to a computer, and are not fluent computerists.
Puppy Linux's [url=http://www.murga-linux.com/puppy/viewtopic.php?p=296352#296352]Mission[/url]

Sorry, my server is down atm!

User avatar
ttuuxxx
Posts: 11171
Joined: Sat 05 May 2007, 10:00
Location: Ontario Canada,Sydney Australia
Contact:

#30 Post by ttuuxxx »

ecomoney wrote:
I dont think the results of this poll should be taken seriously, as the Puppy Forum a lot more frequented by serious developers than end users. I
Well then it should be taken even more serious due to the fact that people who are voting actually have an idea how things work, and If its developers voting against Pwidgets then that alone is very important, due to the fact that they know that unnecessary programs that take a lot of system resources by default are bad for the user and bad for puppy's reputation as a OS that just works on older computers. I think as long as Pwidgets is on by default, Puppy should raise its min resources, to 256mb of ram min., forget 128mb or less. Also I take this poll serious because of it, I'm trying to get WhoDo to make 1 extra final unofficial version without Pwidgets and this is the proof I have. Once pwidgets is gone, WhoDo could replace Claws mail with the full Seamonkey suite and still be right around the 100MB area. That should make a lot of people happy. So you can take this Poll VERY serious because the version it will produce will probably end it on your systems that you provide people.
ttuuxxx
http://audio.online-convert.com/ <-- excellent site
http://samples.mplayerhq.hu/A-codecs/ <-- Codec Test Files
http://html5games.com/ <-- excellent HTML5 games :)

User avatar
jhecht
Posts: 227
Joined: Sun 29 Jan 2006, 17:36
Location: New York City (Manhattan)
Contact:

have the best of both...

#31 Post by jhecht »

My congratulations to Ecomoney on his Puppian exploits! You support 150+ Puppified computers? My hero! :)

Why not have the bloody bling >switchable< on/off? Like Window$ 'best appearance' or 'best performance'? I have no objection to bling being available - just don't impose it on me if I don't want it!
John Hechtman / www.zenarrow.com / jhecht@ix.netcom.com
"Computer help in NYC" / 917 628 0192 - cell / 212 586 4633 - landline

User avatar
cb88
Posts: 1165
Joined: Mon 29 Jan 2007, 03:12
Location: USA
Contact:

#32 Post by cb88 »

why don't you just set the priority of the bling very low.... then it shouldn't interfere with normal tasks

I'm not one to be all pro bing by default just a suggestion
Taking Puppy Linux to the limit of perfection. meanwhile try "puppy pfix=duct_tape" kernel parem eater.
X86: Sager NP6110 3630QM 16GB ram, Tyan Thunder 2 2x 300Mhz
Sun: SS2 , LX , SS5 , SS10 , SS20 ,Ultra 1, Ultra 10 , T2000
Mac: Platinum Plus, SE/30

User avatar
01micko
Posts: 8741
Joined: Sat 11 Oct 2008, 13:39
Location: qld
Contact:

Re: have the best of both...

#33 Post by 01micko »

jhecht wrote:My congratulations to Ecomoney on his Puppian exploits! You support 150+ Puppified computers? My hero! :)

Why not have the bloody bling >switchable< on/off? Like Window$ 'best appearance' or 'best performance'? I have no objection to bling being available - just don't impose it on me if I don't want it!
Pwidgets gui has an option to switch it off from V2.0 onwards :)
Puppy Linux Blog - contact me for access

User avatar
ecomoney
Posts: 2178
Joined: Fri 25 Nov 2005, 07:00
Location: Lincolnshire, England
Contact:

#34 Post by ecomoney »

"take it seriously" was a bad phrase to use, sorry for any offense. What I meant is that the results would not necessarily reflect what puppys "target audience" (Linux newbs) might like to see. The people here are here because they are, on the whole, happy with how puppy is at the moment.

Ive often thought that the reason Windows does so well against linux is because their developers are paid to produce an operating system that is simple for ordinary computer users to understand and use, therefore they will buy it and continue to pay them. If they had been left to their own devices then Im sure windows would look very different...probably a lot more like Linux!!!

If linux wants to do better and become the world most used operating system, then its developers must have the same kind of attitude, to produce something that will be of more use to more people than just themselves....but do it for free.

Pwidgets solves a problem for new puppy users, and makes the whole thing a lot more accessible to them. It doesnt make puppy do any more than it does already, but it does make the more important functions more accessible to and usable by them. Zigbert has done a great job in identifying a real world need, and programming a solution to a problem that he doesnt even have himself! IMHO He deserves great applause for this and should be a role model for other linux developers to follow.

If we need to make space, then lets drop other programs that most "linux newbs" dont need, like a mail client at all (most people use webmail), gnumeric, the web page composer in seamonkey etc etc and make those optional add ons.. Perhaps then we would have room for things that are important to end users, like a modern flash player that will work on old computers with most sites well into the future (flash 10 is an extra 2mb). Puppy 4.2 is still a long way from how my "customers" would like to see it, and I am sure I will have to spend hours modifying it as it is. :-(

@jhecht, being able to look after as many computers as I do would not be possible unless the puppy developers had done a great deal of work under the hood to make it reliable, and neither would it have been possible unless I had spent a great amount of time customizing the user interface to make it useable. Different people have different skills, and they are all needed.
Puppy Linux's [url=http://www.murga-linux.com/puppy/viewtopic.php?p=296352#296352]Mission[/url]

Sorry, my server is down atm!

User avatar
canbyte
Posts: 264
Joined: Sat 10 Jan 2009, 20:20
Location: Hamilton, Canada

#35 Post by canbyte »

No bling thanks, but pwidgets? How do i know, what does it do anyway?
Typical of geeks, everyone assumes the reader knows what you're talking about. Ecomoney said it worked well in 412 so i looked around and did not find it. How long am i supposed to work/read/search for something to replace what i've worked so hard to get working properly. Upgrade to 4.2 - why? especially if threatened with bloat (even a little). So not knowing what i'm dealing with, i just reacted to bling, bloat and bother.

Ecomoney or various said something about making puppy more accessible, without of course ;-) giving me anything further to go on. But on a GUI machine, the only thing that is inaccessible is something with a problem. All else is accessible if you know the procedure/ where to look and THAT is the proper role of a manual, a wiki, a tutorial, a video or an Ecomoney! The former are in great need of improvement and i wish the latter lived closer to ME! Therefore, pwidgets should be a .pet.

Barrie's 3rd objective, being friendly to newbies can either be achieved by cloning every look and function of windows OR by proper documentation and teaching. The latter course is MUCH better than the former, EXCEPT when windows refugees MUST keep, open and resave old files and/or interface with windows-using colleagues. Tall order.

Well, Puppy is just a puppy, not a working dog (yet). Enjoy.
[color=orange]1. Dell Dimension E521, AMD Athln 64, 2 GHz 1.93GB ram,
Puppy 533 on CD, accesses flash drive only,
FFox Nightly12.0
2. Compaq P3 733Hz 375RAM
Printer: Oki C3400 > LAN [/color]

Post Reply