Another Puppy Review / Intro

[benali72]

A new Puppy review and intro is posted here -- https://rexxinfo.org/howard_fosdick_art ... light.html

[vtpup]

A new Puppy review and intro is posted here -- https://rexxinfo.org/howard_fosdick_art ... light.html

Excellent. Well written and it clearly and economically explains Puppy Linux's manifold uses and advantages. In fact I feel like it should be adopted as a beginner's intro here on the forum and in the Wiki (with permission and credit).

It's a tough job explaining the complex differences in Puppy as a collection of OSs to others in understandable language, and all in one compact statement. This really works well. Good job.

[rockedge]

In fact I feel like it should be adopted as a beginner's intro here on the forum and in the Wiki (with permission and credit).

I agree and we should try to get permission to use it! Sooner than later........we are trying to attract future potential developers to work on the next generations of woof-CE that produce the Puppy's and this is a great introduction.

[geo_c]

Yes that's one of the best, most concise breakdowns of puppy I've ever read.

[dimkr]

This review demonstrates why https://puppylinux.com/ shouldn't offer old Puppy releases. Reviewers just grab the first option they see in this homepage, then talk about unmaintained things like PPM and the old Puppy installer that doesn't support UEFI.

[benali72]

Thank you all for the feedback.

The article now states it is licensed under Creative Commons license, CC BY-ND 4.0. (BY-ND says that only the author can change its contents).

Anyone can post it anywhere they think it might be of use.

Also a line is added that states the review covers FossaPup64 9.5. All screenhots are from that version.

@dimkr -- are not FossaPup64 9.5 and its screens for PPM and the installer current?

If not, please advise what version this review should cover. Thank you.

[dimkr]

please advise what version this review should cover. Thank you.

BookwormPup64 - it's not years old and unmaintained, it includes apt, supports Bluetooth audio, supports Flatpak, has broad hardware support comparable to Debian live image, and it already had multiple point releases that fix bugs and incorporate security updates.

[mikeslr]

This review demonstrates why https://puppylinux.com/ shouldn't offer old Puppy releases. Reviewers just grab the first option they see in this homepage, then talk about unmaintained things like PPM and the old Puppy installer that doesn't support UEFI.

Or https://puppylinux.com/ should provide a 'Caution' with advice to check https://www.forum.puppylinux.com/viewforum.php?f=114 for the latest releases AND the OP of each Puppy appearing on in that Section which is no-longer recommended should contain a warning such as:

"Tahrpup 6.0.5 was released 16/12/2015 and is no longer actively maintained. It is not recommended for general use unless your computer's limitations prevent newer Puppys from being run satisfactorily. Don't hesitate to ask for recommendations."

IMHO, such warning should be given for anything older than Bionicpup --and maybe even Bionicpup because Ubuntu has archived Bionic Beaver's repos. Perhaps, where an updated version has been published, the OP should provide a link to the updated versions Thread.

We all have our 'old' favorites; and we 'old-timers' know the tricks and techniques which may over-come the limitations of those 'old-favorites'. But those are not the Puppys for newbies unless they have no better choice.

[benali72]

@mikesir -- I agree that a better way to indicate supported Puppies is in order. The goal should be to point a person new to Puppy to the most current releases.

I've worked with Puppy since 2006, have installed it on many dozens of computers (I do refurbishing), and have written reviews of it in the past.

But my job doesn't allow me time to keep up with the forums. I recall seeing mentions of BookWormPup64 but no clear statement that it supercedes FossaPup or is recommended instead.

A quick homepage update might be in order to clarify the recommended Puppy releases.

[ozsouth]

@benali72 - it is confusing. Distrowatch shows as pic below - 'puppy 22.12' (s15pup) first - as was anointed by forum poll in Oct 2022. It is still being actively developed - 32 & 64 bit non-usrmerge. Bookwormpup is the latest development. Then there are many others (I personally have recently released updates to the top 4 below).
Our homepage shows Fossapup64 9.5 first in the downloads, so that's what folks would currently choose, despite s15pup64's image being featured. (I'm not sure what order they should be in - maybe newest first?) Also, I think that since about 2011, ubuntu derivatives have been preferred by most folk (not me).

top4pups_on_distrowatch.jpg (204.41 KiB) Viewed 752 times

[dimkr]

(I'm not sure what order they should be in - maybe newest first?) Also, I think that since about 2011, ubuntu derivatives have been preferred by most folk (not me).

... And screenshots, DistroWatch announcements, etc' should match the first option, not a relatively unpopular option.

[benali72]

Thanks to everyone's feedback, an improved version is now available.

The part on Puppy versions is the most updated section -- https://rexxinfo.org/howard_fosdick_art ... hats_puppy .

But there are also a few other updates scattered throughout.

Thank you for any comments.

[mikeslr]

Very nice article. Thanks for your efforts.

[vtpup]

I have a new laptop, all Intel standard stuff aboard (graphics, wifi). S-15 is no better than Fossapup in its lack of usability on a so called modern machine. At startup it lacks wifi card and sound card support, and if I was a new user experimenting with linux I'd probably stop there and go back to Windows.

I also have an 12 year old laptop that performs extremely well for its age under Fossapup64, in fact it can do video rendering with kdenlive, a very demanding requirement for any computer. It lacks nothing to be a heavy duty daily driver for me, except higher speed USB ports, and in fact was used for that until last week.

If we are saying the focus of Puppy linux should be seen by others as a "current" OS, that is mistaken. Puppy Linux isn't Windows with hardware manufacturers chasing OS certification. It will never be a current OS. It will always necessarily be a collection of interesting Linux OS's suitable for recent to older hardware. With some versions more mature than others and with users supporting extensions and workarounds for the latest hardware via user contributions on a forum.

Using the term "unsupported" is also a mistake, since this forum is the de facto support for both the oldest and newest puppies. And yes "current" puppies need at least as much forum support as the more tried and true versions.

I think it's time to stop the competitive utterances and support each other in the diversity that is Puppy Linux. There is no one puppy that is "better" than another. Each puppy fills a different need and preference. Both "new" and old puppy versions get developed and modified all the time here.

On this latest hardware, I've settled for now on Fossapup F96-CE with a later kernel added. This suits the current hardware and my preferences in Puppy Linux better than anything else I've tried so far. Does this mean it's the best "current" puppy. No, there is no such thing.

[rockedge]

I agree with @vtpup and share the same philosophy. Best description of this I've read.

Current is the one that works on the hardware at hand. I use KLV's and F96-CE_4 because these OS's run really well on the equipment I have.

That includes a machine that has done hard work well that is a 2004-2006 DELL tower, 32 bit only, running on Tahr-6.0.5 since the Tahrpup's existed. Does a fantastic job as acting as an Airprint capable printer server and handles scanning really well. Plus all the PDF work and document editing that is needed before a print job that needs some fixes. Nothing on it has been upgraded in 10+ years

[benali72]

I agree with @vtpup, too. Well said. Puppy's diversity is its strength. Different users will naturally favor different versions depending on their needs. Hopefully the article reflects this attitude. There's room for folks who use all different Puppies for their different needs and purposes.

[dimkr]

The range of computers considered to be 'old' is expanding. A very old Puppy is unlikely to support hardware that came out after its release date, while every Puppy is likely to support hardware that came out before its release.

For example, BionicPup64 might work in a computer with a 12th gen Intel CPU, but it won't work well (because it doesn't understand P cores vs. E cores) and probably won't support the WiFi chipset. A recent Puppy will probably work better (better performance, better power efficiency) and support all hardware, but it might drop support for some early 2000s hardware supported by old Puppy releases.

Considering the small population of early 2000s computers, a recent Puppy is more likely to work with a random computer. That is why I think the top spot in puppylinux.com should be given to the newest Puppy release or the one with the broadest hardware support (BookwormPup64's fdrv is very very generous, and apt provides things like nvidia drivers).

[d-pupp]

I agree with @dimkr lets put the latest a most up to date version of puppy first.
It has the best chance of supporting their hardware and has the latest security updates. That gives them the best chance of having a good user experience.
It also makes it more likely that a reviewer will test the latest puppy and not an older one.

There is plenty of room for many pups and it is easy to try another after the first one is running.

However I must say looking at the download page is confusing. If I hadn't been on this forum for a year I wouldn't know which pup to try. Maybe a short description could be added?