Puppy 4.2 Bling Or No Bling ANNONYMOUS POLL

[01micko]

I voted for: no bloat, no bling. Keep adding bloat and you'll soon lose users/market.

I had already stated my opinion about such matters in another thread concerning why people still use old versions of Puppy, so I won't repeat that here; I couldn't care less how old or new the computer is, I loathe bloat (which is in any case easier to add later than to remove later). My opinion is expressed here:

One day we will have to become responsible world citizens. The Modern Desktop: in the future their will be no room for stupid bloat and not having to maintain such extravagance will give us back some free time too!

Hereś something I cannot comprehend. Pwidgets is, and absolutely is unashamed BLING. However it doesn´t make much clang. Is it bloat? 222KB?

This thread is about BLING not BLOAT!

[ttuuxxx]

Hang on,Mick

Mick its nothing to do with Pwidgets, its more to do with the backend Conky, thats where the resources are being taken, Back in 302CE days I was against conky being installed and I was a co-coordinator, WhoDo knew from the start where I stood on Conky, I did give you a couple of alternatives about 2 weeks ago, which if you guys investigated them you'll notice they take almost no resources and the render layers on the desktop way better than conky and have a better gui, plus they it was made for plugins. It would of been a much better backend system. plus you could of used lots of prepackage plugins. and it was 1/4 the size. If you spent like 1 -2 days trying that system you would notice it would of been worth the switch. Anyways its too late now.
ttuuxxx

[floborg]

Call me simplistic, but how about 2 separate packages for each release?

Puppy 4.2, and Puppy 4.2B (for "bling")...

Seems like a .pet could be created for all of the extra features.

Just my $.02, adjusted for inflation...

Like EZpup? I guess there will be no EZPup 4.2.

[ttuuxxx]

I voted for: no bloat, no bling. Keep adding bloat and you'll soon lose users/market.

I had already stated my opinion about such matters in another thread concerning why people still use old versions of Puppy, so I won't repeat that here; I couldn't care less how old or new the computer is, I loathe bloat (which is in any case easier to add later than to remove later). My opinion is expressed here:

One day we will have to become responsible world citizens. The Modern Desktop: in the future their will be no room for stupid bloat and not having to maintain such extravagance will give us back some free time too!

Hereś something I cannot comprehend. Pwidgets is, and absolutely is unashamed BLING. However it doesn´t make much clang. Is it bloat? 222KB?

This thread is about BLING not BLOAT!

ahhhhhhh you dropped your conky size down by a lot excellent
pwidgets plus the old conky was around 500kb now it 222kb must of removed a lot of comments to reduce it that much
ttuuxxx

[01micko]

WhoDo knew from the start where I stood on Conky, I did give you a couple of alternatives about 2 weeks ago, which if you guys investigated them you'll notice they take almost no resources and the render layers on the desktop way better than conky and have a better gui, plus they it was made for plugins. It would of been a much better backend system. plus you could of used lots of prepackage plugins. and it was 1/4 the size. If you spent like 1 -2 days trying that system you would notice it would of been worth the switch. Anyways its too late now.

At the late stage of development it was too late then mate

Any how, Patriot did significantly Improve Conky, and really now, it isn´t the issue.

Isn´t the issue now to make a bling free puplet?

Cheers

[ttuuxxx]

WhoDo knew from the start where I stood on Conky, I did give you a couple of alternatives about 2 weeks ago, which if you guys investigated them you'll notice they take almost no resources and the render layers on the desktop way better than conky and have a better gui, plus they it was made for plugins. It would of been a much better backend system. plus you could of used lots of prepackage plugins. and it was 1/4 the size. If you spent like 1 -2 days trying that system you would notice it would of been worth the switch. Anyways its too late now.

At the late stage of development it was too late then mate

Any how, Patriot did significantly Improve Conky, and really now, it isn´t the issue.

Isn´t the issue now to make a bling free puplet?

Cheers

Yes Mick now the issue is to make a unofficial official like puppy version, I was thinking about calling it
'Puppies 4.2 Deeper thought' hows that grab you? lol
ttuuxxx

[01micko]

WhoDo knew from the start where I stood on Conky, I did give you a couple of alternatives about 2 weeks ago, which if you guys investigated them you'll notice they take almost no resources and the render layers on the desktop way better than conky and have a better gui, plus they it was made for plugins. It would of been a much better backend system. plus you could of used lots of prepackage plugins. and it was 1/4 the size. If you spent like 1 -2 days trying that system you would notice it would of been worth the switch. Anyways its too late now.

At the late stage of development it was too late then mate

Any how, Patriot did significantly Improve Conky, and really now, it isn´t the issue.

Isn´t the issue now to make a bling free puplet?

Cheers

Yes Mick now the issue is to make a unofficial official like puppy version, I was thinking about calling it
'Puppies 4.2 Deeper thought' hows that grab you? lol
ttuuxxx

A little bit cheeky! I bet you were a cheeky kid!lol!

[ttuuxxx]

A little bit cheeky! I bet you were a cheeky kid!lol!

Ya I was always getting slapped for being cheeky as a kid, sometimes my mother would slap me because her hand was hurting because she was slapping me so much for being cheeky, lol
ttuuxxx

[brymway]

86

[ttuuxxx]

Anybody with a "low" number of post should be carefull. It seems ttuuxxx doesn't really care what you think.

Wow! Your arrogance is astounding. Your edgy response to my positive intentions are really surprising. I was making a suggestion to try and keep peace and you go and become elitist on me. I suppose that all those who have less than four digits shouldn't even bother casting their vote in the poll either? Or is it ok as long as they agree with the poll taker?

The egos of the "high numbers" here lately are really tiresome. It's giving this distro a bad name. You guys use to be helpful and humble, now, not so much.

I'm sorry for my negative attitude. I thought this was an open forum. I'll try and steer clear of you guys.

What are you going on about? did you not read that user at the time was ripping down in the forum and thats how i responded back to his rude comments, it has nothing to do with numbers it had to do with his general attitudes and thanks Trapster for posting a snip and not the whole case at hand, if you really want know what he said to peeve me off. here read this http://www.murga-linux.com/puppy/viewto ... 8&start=75

ttuuxxx

[tronkel]

ttuuxxx wrote:

Ya I was always getting slapped for being cheeky as a kid, sometimes my mother would slap me because her hand was hurting because she was slapping me so much for being cheeky, lol Very Happy
ttuuxxx

In computer science that's what is known as recursion - but can lead to the computer freezing and crashing! - lol

[bigbeck]

My vote goes to bling if puppy's prime audience is the average newbie/enduser.

I'm thinking it only needs Seamonkey,Abiword,a few games,music software and about a hundred wallpapers and themes! It should also boot into Seamonkey. No questions to answer. Except maybe "how are you feeling today"? Desktop icons should include: Internet, music, games,write, wallpaper and quit. Sheesh, already it's too complicated! What about just Seamonkey? You can then get anything you need from the internet. That's it! Just Seamonkey and Quit icons.
The bling would automatically change each day.

The internet is destroying the whole world!

[raffy]

The egos of the "high numbers" here lately are really tiresome. It's giving this distro a bad name. You guys use to be helpful and humble, now, not so much.

Are you referring to ttuuxxx? He usually edits out the heat from his posts (ie, after he cools off). If some heat still remains in the posts, then he's still hot. LOL

AFAIK, what Windows users cannot understand in Puppy is that you can use it without touching your hard disk. And speaking of touching your hard disk, the users further expect that they can toss tons of new programs into their system and hope that it still runs nicely.

Puppy's easy-install mode (frugal install or use CD only) limits this software-pit approach to applications because of the limited size of the save file. IMHO, ecomoney has built a large save file for his users following this usage pattern.

So the ordinary/Win refugee problem is not about bling but is about the big software-addition pit. And that translates to an easy to use package management and lots of additional software. What Barry is doing with Woof will help solve this need.

[mcewanw]

Hereś something I cannot comprehend. Pwidgets is, and absolutely is unashamed BLING. However it doesn´t make much clang. Is it bloat? 222KB?

This thread is about BLING not BLOAT!

The concern is rarely to do with storage size per se. People make a lot of generally unnecessary fuss about keeping the iso down below 100MB, for example, when the real issue is what it expands to, and more importantly, what resources it uses, on installation (RAM usage, number of processes started/CPU usage).

Certainly, time moves on and hardware becomes more sophisticated such that there comes a time when yesteryears hardware isn't worth supporting anymore. But that isn't my concern. Rather it is philisophical in terms of my opinion being that the "best" distribution is the one which gives the user choice (bling or no bling). If you bind the "unnecessary" bling into the system, you are forcing users to use it, when some would rather have as simple and fast a system as they can get. The best solution, I feel, is to keep bling as an add-on. What is the problem with that?!

Arguments about how resource hungry such add-ons are isn't the main point, in other words (though such concerns are important); the argument is about "choice". I sometimes use go-faster-stripes too, or system stats in pretty widgets; life and fun should go together. But bling, more generally, is not always fun, sometimes it is an unnecessary, unwanted pain in the neck(!); suchlike shouldn't be "forced" down peoples throats, but rather it should be offered as a possibly fun, useful, or pretty extra or option.

Bear in mind, however, that "bling" tends to grow in hunger in line with hardware/system developments (hence my earlier reference to the ills of consumerism).

[01micko]

The concern is rarely to do with storage size per se. People make a lot of generally unnecessary fuss about keeping the iso down below 100MB, for example, when the real issue is what it expands to, and more importantly, what resources it uses, on installation (RAM usage, number of processes started/CPU usage).

Now this is why I said Pwidgets doesn´t make much clang. I did ram tests before we optimised Pwidgets and they were quite favourable.

Certainly, time moves on and hardware becomes more sophisticated such that there comes a time when yesteryears hardware isn't worth supporting anymore. But that isn't my concern. Rather it is philisophical in terms of my opinion being that the "best" distribution is the one which gives the user choice (bling or no bling). If you bind the "unnecessary" bling into the system, you are forcing users to use it, when some would rather have as simple and fast a system as they can get. The best solution, I feel, is to keep bling as an add-on. What is the problem with that?!

Well yes it is there by default but can be switched off in 4 clicks. I am confident it will run on most old clunkers. Personally I wouldn´t care if it was an add on, but that is not my decision and WhoDo has his reasons for including Pwidgets by default.

Arguments about how resource hungry such add-ons are isn't the main point, in other words (though such concerns are important); the argument is about "choice". I sometimes use go-faster-stripes too, or system stats in pretty widgets, life and fun should go together. But bling, more generally, is not always fun, sometimes it is an unnecessary, unwanted pain in the neck(!); suchlike shouldn't be "forced" down peoples throats, but rather it should be offered as a possibly fun, useful, or pretty extra or option.

I can see your point but no one is forcing anything down any one´s throat! 4 clicks (I asked zigbert to make it 2)

Bear in mind, however, that "bling" tends to grow in hunger in line with hardware developments (hence my earlier reference to the ills of consumerism).

We have actually made Pwidgets smaller and more efficient since the first version. We are not going to add any more default widgets at this stage, but add-ons are available.

Thanks for your comments and observations. All this helps us become better developers!

Cheers

[mcewanw]

Microsoft lead the (bad) way ...

They purposively limited user-choice by binding IE core routines into their OS.

Puppy official forces users to use Seamonkey. But it becomes more than that: the Gecko layout/rendering engine becomes seen as a core part of Puppy so that Puppy developers can expect it to be there for further application development.

Puppy is great, no doubt about it, but no such status remains forever certain.

DSL was mentioned somewhere in the passing by zigbert (as being for embedded systems: http://www.murga-linux.com/puppy/viewto ... start=1890). DSL certainly was/is limited and better sometimes for older systems (since using an older kernel). Yet, for most of its life it remained above Puppy in terms of overall popularity (at least if we are to believe Distrowatch). But quite suddenly really, DSL appears to be almost dead, (and look at Puppy sitting high on Distrowatch now).

But out of DSL there is born a new contender (with new kernel) arising out of the ashes of DSL's much publicised internal bickering and breakup. TC isn't high on Distrowatch as yet (such takes time) and its 10 MByte core distribution is by design no full-blown desktop at all - but the concept is there for producing Puplet like TC-based distributions to any specification required.

For now Puppy is best, but I'd hate to see it lose out through repeating any of the (on purpose) "mistakes" of Microsoft.

[01micko]

Microsoft lead the (bad) way ...

They purposively limited user-choice by binding IE core routines into their OS.

Puppy official forces users to use Seamonkey. But it becomes more than that: the Gecko layout/rendering engine becomes seen as a core part of Puppy so that Puppy developers can expect it to be there for further application development.

See your point there, but what do you suggest?

(sorry for off topic!)

[mcewanw]

Well yes it is there by default but can be switched off in 4 clicks.
. . .
what do you suggest?

It is not enough just to disable what could/should be an optional extra. At the very least there should be a "button" which allows the user to automatically remove any such "extra" entirely

[as indeed Microsoft seems to be offering in Windows 7 when it comes to IE (not that Microsoft's compromised practice is ever the best model to follow with confidence)]

[01micko]

Like I said, not my decision, fair idea though. Maybe `pet-be-gone´ should have been included in the release but it isn´t.

WhoDo is doing what he thinks is best for Puppy. Time is the true test...

[mcewanw]

see next post