 |
Puppy Linux Discussion Forum Puppy HOME page : puppylinux.com "THE" alternative forum : puppylinux.info
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in|
The time now is Thu 26 Feb 2015, 20:56 All times are UTC - 4 |
 Forum index » Taking the Puppy out for a walk » Announcements |
|
Puppy Ripped off by Google Developer??
Moderators: Flash, Ian, JohnMurga |
 
|
View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Page 2 of 5 [66 Posts] | Goto page: Previous 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 Next |
| Author | Message | ||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
jeff-nelson
 Joined: 21 Feb 2013 Posts: 23 Location: South Lake Tahoe, CA |
Hi folks, I'm Jeff Nelson. I saw your thread and thought I'd add my two cents. First, let me say that I love Puppy. I've been using it for years. Even at Google, I used my modified version as my primary dev box for 18 months inside Google, because in my opinion it was vastly superior to Google's other internal operating system choices for engineers.
I don't see how you think I "ripped off" anything. First, other than a very small bonus for the patent (which is not a patent on Puppy btw) I never made a dime off this whole project. Second, Puppy is GPL and I didn't violate any terms of the GPL. Third, when Chrome OS was released, it was also open sourced.
Yes exactly. It's a Google naming convention to re-engineer an existing product and stick a "G" at the front. So Puppy becomes "Guppy". My product manager and I quickly changed the name to "Google OS" as that was easier to pitch to management.
To some extent. I don't want to go into any detail, as its certainly covered by the NDA I signed for Google. Google takes their NDAs and trade secrets very seriously.
I definitely have never claimed to have invented PuppyLinux. In fact I didn't even bring up the name "PuppyLinux" outside Google - or any other technical specifics of the work I did at that time, that Google might consider covered by their NDA. Some people are confused why the patent doesn't spell out "Chrome OS" or the full operating system. Patents are not product specifications or design documents. A patent only specify the construction of one small, unique feature that goes into a product. I had actually written two patents for different features in the Google OS distribution, but Google apparently didn't follow thorough with filing the second patent.
Yes, thats a very, very roughly accurate summary. I don't mean to say that I invented everything that goes into an OS, wrote the OS from scratch, or built the computer it ran on, etc.
I know some commentors are claiming there's no novelty, because Marc Andressen invented the web browser... so... it's not new. But thats like saying, Grog the Cave Man invented the wheel, so the Toyota Prius is not new. There's still plenty of room for novelty and innovation in the software industry, despite the fact that related stuff may have occurred in the past. Now that we have Microsoft at one end of the dipole and Chrome OS at the other end - I hope we will see even more entries into the consumer Operating System Wars. Certainly, I don't think the status quo of consumer operating systems (or web browsers for that matter) is particularly good. I'm just glad I was at the right place, at the right time, and with the right mindset, to realize the product vision behind Chrome OS, and push Chrome OS through at Google back in 2007. Having access to an excellent GPL open source Linux distribution like Puppy Linux was definitely a big part of that. And the PuppyLinux community, and Barry Kauler in particular, deserve my thanks. - Jeff PS - Now if you want a piece of the patent bonus that Google paid me for this project... I'll buy you half a beer sometime and we'll call it even. Last edited by jeff-nelson on Fri 22 Feb 2013, 00:26; edited 1 time in total |
||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||
 |
|||||||||||||||
|
jeff-nelson
Joined: 21 Feb 2013 Posts: 23 Location: South Lake Tahoe, CA |
I'm a little confused by this statement. Unless you are a Google employee you couldn't possibly have a copy of the original "Google OS" (aka Guppy) distribution that I sent out to a company-wide, internal email list at Google. Did someone else publish a Linux distribution they called "googleOS" perhaps? |
||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||
NeroVance
 Joined: 10 Oct 2012 Posts: 182 Location: Canada |
Hey Jeff. If this is actually Jeff. I quite understand Google being fairly secretive, even if massive enough to swallow YouTube and 'em up. I kinda wonder if someone else claimed to have made a "googleos", I do wonder if they are thinking of "gOs" that was at one point used on some netbooks back in the day. |
||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||
Q5sys
 Joined: 11 Dec 2008 Posts: 1115 |
I agree that this was probably what the other poster meant. gOS tauted itself as, "An alternative OS with Google Apps and other Web 2.0 apps for the modern user." Even came bundled on the 'Cloudbook' back in the day. They even went so far as to use the same stylized g for their logo. _logo.png/120px-GOS_(operating_system)_logo.png){kind=logo}
More info can be found here: http://distrowatch.com/table.php?distribution=gos 
_________________ 
 |
||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||
|
NeroVance
Joined: 10 Oct 2012 Posts: 182 Location: Canada |
Oh my 
I remember that thing, I wonder what became of that thing? |
||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||
|
starhawk
Joined: 22 Nov 2010 Posts: 3464 Location: Everybody knows this is nowhere... |
@NeroVance: http://gosforums.org/viewtopic.php?f=18&t=4339 Looks like the dev dude got bored and moved on... or something like that 
EDIT: D'oh! Link fixed. _________________  Last edited by starhawk on Fri 22 Feb 2013, 14:41; edited 1 time in total |
||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||
|
nooby
Joined: 29 Jun 2008 Posts: 10557 Location: SwedenEurope |
I may have tested that greenOS it looks very familiar. But I have puppies and other linuxes on some 5 different computers so I am too lazy to boot all of them up just to find out. 
I am curious on if Greenguy really had the one Jeff talks about could it not have been Chrome compiled for to be booted on intel cpu there where such several of them some years ago. Even I manged to boot one of these but them where android AFAIK. _________________ I use Google Search on Puppy Forum not an ideal solution though |
||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||
|
Caneri
Joined: 04 Sep 2007 Posts: 1580 Location: Canada |
If all of this is true, then this definitely is a feather in Puppy Linux's hat...congrats to Barry for sure!! Also, if true, and I have a tendency to think that it is true, I wonder if Google would consider high speed server space for our little project. Just a thought. Some people would recoil at the thought but my mind says growing is good...so grow if possible. I was going to move to Debian/Ubuntu/BSD etc but as Smokey01 said to me awhile back..."we are Puppy and it works so why move onto another bloated OS...we are happy as clams" (this isn't an exact quote..sorry Grant..but the point is well taken) I for one am intrigued by the prospect that Puppy finally made it onto phones (one of my original request to Telus Corp). Resistance is Futile...Eric _________________ Be not afraid to grow slowly, only be afraid of standing still. Chinese Proverb |
||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||
|
greengeek
Joined: 20 Jul 2010 Posts: 2886 Location: New Zealand |
Yes, that's similar to what I remember. Obviously not googleOS then. Cheeky of them to have passed it off as googleOS though. |
||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||
|
NeroVance
Joined: 10 Oct 2012 Posts: 182 Location: Canada |
You got Telus to offer phones with Puppy on them? Neat! I use Bell (Aliant actually, it's the division in my region), hence who knows. Still, a Canadian service offering excellent phones with Puppy (I hope), that sounds swell. |
||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||
darkcity
 Joined: 23 May 2010 Posts: 2495 Location: near here |
If Jeff is the real Jeff then he is virtually admitting Google has patented some technology that already existed in Puppy - and therefore under the GPL license. _________________ helping Wiki for help | IF SendSpace link = "dead" THEN PM me ("up file to http://meownplanet.net/") |
||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||
musher0
 Joined: 04 Jan 2009 Posts: 4794 Location: Gatineau (Qc), Canada |
Euh... http://distro.ibiblio.org/amigolinux/ ?
_________________ "Logical entities must not be multiplied needlessly." / "Il ne faut pas multiplier les êtres logiques inutilement." (Ockham) |
||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||
|
ICPUG
Joined: 24 Jul 2005 Posts: 1290 Location: UK |
It is interesting that Puppy was the inspiration to Jeff but it seems to me from Jeff's original post that it was running in RAM that he liked and the patent was something to do with net loading apps. I don't care really. The whole American patent system is mad - it discourages the small guy and can be used against non-American firms to hinder their ability to compete. What intrigues me is Amigo's comment that Puppy was not the first Live CD to run in RAM. I am intrigued. It certainly was not the first Live CD but I'd love to know which other Linux ran in RAM by default and was a full blown system like Puppy. Knoppix could be set by cheatcode to run in RAM but the default was to run from CD and you needed a lot of RAM to run solely in RAM. Damn Small LInux was based on Knoppix so did not run in RAM by default. What other small footprint GUI Linux's were around in the early days of Puppy? |
||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||
puppy_apprentice
 Joined: 07 Feb 2012 Posts: 142 |
in 2003 i was testing ByzantineOS - Linux with Mozilla as Desktop, loaded to RAM - something like grandfather (or one of grandfathers?) for FirefoxOS and GoogleOS? http://distrowatch.com/table.php?distribution=byzantineos |
||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||
|
amigo
Joined: 02 Apr 2007 Posts: 2328 |
I'm pretty sure that Knoppix also loaded to RAM from the very start -before it even had persistence. I tried it out once on an old PII -I think it took about 20 minutes to load to the (KDE2) desktop. Wait, I can already hear the next comment -Yeah, Puppy had to come along and invent fast booting... |
||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||
| Page 2 of 5 [66 Posts] | Goto page: Previous 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 Next |
|
|
View previous topic :: View next topic |
|
Forum index » Taking the Puppy out for a walk » Announcements |
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum You cannot attach files in this forum You can download files in this forum |
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group