why? Because of the 2012 link that is old in linux terms says

.

I run Vanguard on one atom netbook and it is not a toy.
But opinions abound. Mine differs I guess.

Same netbook as this one.
http://murga-linux.com/puppy/viewtop...=827470#827470

which dates a little more recent than your link.
I kinda hate it when someone disses a linux distro that thousands are running over personal opinion. You do not hear me dissing arch.

1 members found this post helpful.

If you are using a 64bit system? Fatdog64 is cool. The Puppies are a bit (no pun ) more work than most Ubun*s but you shouldn't be spreading around confidential info on any distro (especially the big square holes in the walls...) Unless you or the admin have secured it?

I agree with your non-recommendation of "puppy." My reason is quite simple -- I've never managed to get it to run direct from my hard drives. It runs nicely from the live CD (or ISO file, in a virtual machine) but even after running its install utility, it requires the CD and loads from it.

When my ancient Mandrake 8.1 system bit the dust almost a decade ago and I discovered that the then-current Mandriva distro could not run on the replacement box, I read about all the wonders of Ubuntu and did some research. I decided that the Xubuntu variation would probably do better on the replacement box since it didn't have a huge amount of RAM, and installed version 7.04 (in 2007). I've been using Xubuntu, which is the XFCE4 variation and omits much of the bloat that has crept into the mainline Ubuntu over the years, ever since. This box runs 14.04.3 and my other system (which serves primarily as my printer server) is still on 12.04.4; I learned early on that it's best to stay with the Long Term Support (LTS) versions, which appear in April of even-numbered years. The other releases seem to be betas for the next LTS, and consequently tend to have more bugs.

The default desktop doesn't bear much resemblance to Vista, Win7, or Win8, but it's quite similar to Win98 or Win95, and is very easy to configure to have almost any appearance you might desire.

Unity, like Win8, was explicitly described as a step toward the "tablet" interface when it first came out. Many folk like it. Many others, like myself, do not. Trying various things via live CD/DVD or USB installations is the best way to decide what's best for you.

My only reply to that is you did not install a boot loader.
Ubuntu holds your hand for that.
Puppy being a 100+ MB iso. Does not hold your hand during the installer phase except to say at the end. Finished. Now you can install a bootloader.
Apple and oranges comparison there.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xxVOH3mo3Gw

Point is moot anyways. The OP is already running Vangaurd Puppy linux and has a thread started already on the fonts in firefox to small for their tastes.

https://www.linuxquestions.org/quest...ox-4175549989/

1 members found this post helpful.

It needs finessing with GRUB, when I've installed it I alredy had GRUB installed and [code]update-grub[\code] didn't find it so (for my partitions &c:)or so... then: http://puppylinux.org/wikka/Grub2

http://puppylinux.org/wikka/GRUB
http://wiki.linuxquestions.org/wiki/GRUB

1 members found this post helpful.

we had this discussion before, rokytnji.
it's true; i have done this once or twice in the past.

my recent comment however was not dissing; i simply wanted to point out how puppy linux fundamentally differs from other linux distros (yes, the root user thing). point this out to a newbie who otherwise probably wouldn't know it. and whatever decision they make later, it's ok with me.

and yes, it is my personal opinion.
just like 99% of all posts on this forum reflect someones personal opinion. but one can still do it politely and reasonably; which i believe i did. not dissing.

99% being opinion?.

That is kinda like me saying to you,

"I did not kick your ass. That other dude did."

Nevermind that I whispered in the dudes ear to go over to you and
give you a piece of my mind.

You may not have been actively dissing.
But your location in your link was

Sigh, your link starts out with

So you posted that link. Which started with that.
In a biker campfire party in the woods.
You would be asked to back that point up.

No, "but but I meant security for noobies" will fly in my peer group.

But I know we are all different from different countries and cultures.
What does not fly with me flies with others and vise versa.

Except for this post. You will never find me posting to new prospective user "I don't recommend Arch for a new user however" .

And then link to negative Arch rant to get my point across.

But no worries ondoho. I know your heart is in the right spot and I respect you as a fellow linux user and bro on the road.

I am just explaining how a bikers mindset works, in the real world.
I do not want to see a geek or nerd get hurt, in the real world, speaking their mind. Around a scooter tramp. Cuz in my world. Payback is a medivac.

So do not take my post to heart. I really only had a second of relapse,
forgetting to follow/listen to my own signature.

If you like Puppy Linux, which uses JWM, then you might want to try JWM as packaged by Ubuntu. Just because you're using Ubuntu doesn't mean you're stuck with their desktop. The right incantation to install JWM is likely similar to sudo apt-get install jwm. After it's installed you can log out and then select JWM at the log in screen - there's a button to the right of your name that expands a list of desktops/window managers you can choose from.

Edit: It looks like the JWM/Desktop setup on Puppy is fairly customized with a few more pieces than just JWM, so a vanilla setup might not be what you want if you're used to the Puppy Linux experience.

XFCE is also a solid choice if you want something a little less spartan than JWM.

Harsh.

ok, let me rephrase that:
"dear op, you stated in your first post that you have difficulty coming to terms with unity, and are looking for alternative, more traditional DEs. you have my complete sympathy & understanding."

Since I'm brand new to Linux, this may sound like an absurd question. I'm okay with that. Where do I find the desktop background image in a given distribution? If possible, I'd like to copy the picture I currently have on my Windows desktop.

http://stackoverflow.com/questions/1...ogrammatically


What distro are you on now? As long as it automatically mounts your windows partitions you can set a background using an image from any-directory... not just /usr/share/wallpapers/ for example. ADD: if it does not mount automatically you could just copy.*jpg* to GNU\Linux*\ext***

http://www.brighthub.com/computing/l...les/18969.aspx
___________________________________
between the
__________________________

You say Unity Sucks in what way? it may suck on looks but on Efficiency it's the best.

"Efficiency" ... Edit\Add ... "fest" ...

^ jamison20000e tends to repeat the last word of the previous post...

if i understand you correctly, you like the default background of your current distro and wonder where it is stored?
most probably in /usr/share/backgrounds, or /usr/share/wallpapers, or, if your DE is xfce4, in /usr/share/xfce4, and so on.