Review: PUD GNU/Linux 0.4.7

Ubuntu meets the Atkins Diet?
By Oli on Sunday, 29th April 2007. More information. Comments.

Oli gives the PUD GNU/Linux project a run for its money over two computers and finds that the real let down is the XFCE window manager that, although fast, is nowhere near as usable as it needs to be to compete in the Linux desktop race.

I've been thinking about reviewing a few Linux distributions for a while now and while browsing around DistroWatch, noticed a shifty looking project called PUD GNU/Linux.

PUD GNU/Linux

PUD is a Chinese distro based on Ubuntu 7.04 (Feisty) and the 2.6.20 kernel. They've patched in several filesystems and through using SquashFS for the loader filesystem, the ISO is a mere 193megs.

I was going to do the full test of PUD on my ancient laptop (PIII 1gHz, 256megs of ram) but there was one problem: WiFi drivers. The PCMCIA card that does this is supported natively in Ubuntu — since 6.10 — but try as I might, nothing could get a response out of it in. So to cut a long story short, I've been testing this on a 3gHz P4 with 768megs of RAM.

BIOS to desktop in 1m23s

My initial reaction to loading was "damn this is fast" — not just on the desktop but also the much older laptop. BIOS to desktop in 1m23s. Some LiveCDs take that long just to display the opening menu! Most of this is down to how much they've stripped out of Ubuntu (namely Gnome) and have replaced it with the really quite excellent XFCE.

As I've already said, PUD is based on Ubuntu — a Gnome based OS... Why didn't they go with Xubuntu?

Out the box software

That's my main bugbear with PUD. I know it's hypocrisy to expect a 193meg distribution to give you a thoroughly good rogering, put you to bed and call you again the next morning. The presentation isn't ideal either, with many of the applications sharing icons in the menu:

PUD applications

PUD comes with the following GUI-based applications:

  • Internet
    • Firefox using the Orbit Grey Custom theme and the following plug-ins:
      • All-in-one Gestures
      • FasterFox
      • FlashGot
      • Gmail Space
      • Tab Mix Plus
      • Video Downloader
    • pcmanx
    • gftp
    • btdownloadgui
    • amule
  • Multimedia
    • VLC Player
    • beep-media-player
    • gqview
  • Word Processor
    • gvim
    • leafpad
    • epdfview
    • xchm

I wouldn't normally list all the software, but seeing as it's a tiny little list like that, I couldn't see the harm.

XFCE made it 50 clicks, a lot of typing and no result

The point I'm trying to make here is you don't get too much to play with. The configuration applets are, in true XFCE style, lightweight but underpowered. As I said earlier, getting Ubuntu to find my Laptop's WiFi and connect to the network was 2 clicks of effort. XFCE made it 50 clicks, a lot of typing and no result.

They've also localised the whole thing to Chinese and thought this sounds like it might cause you a lot of issues, the system does go some distance to detect what you're on and give you English... The one problem is they haven't gone the whole way.

Dodgy Chinese names on English apps

Smotherings of applications and libraries (including Perl) are broken because they can't decide what language to use and while I'm sure this could be fixed, it's certainly not pretty.

For Windows users?

While fairly similar to Windows, XFCE is just slightly too raw for your average Windows user. They certainly wouldn't have a clue about setting it up and getting things installed considering that your only option for that on PUD is via the command line.

PUD did find the NTFS partition on the desktop without issue and I was able to pull things off it and beam them across the network via SMB.

In conclusion...

PUD is possibly the fastest LiveCD I've used but it isn't for many people. It doesn't have the applications built onto it to be useful to technicians (to debug hardware, etc) and the same reason again for it not being useful to your average end consumer.

The only real use I could see for PUD is sticking it on a really low end piece of hardware and using it as an internet kiosk. For that, it would do splendidly because it is so light.

I fear many of the usability issues are not a complaint with the PUD project, rather XFCE. It is simple. It is lightweight but it has to go another few miles before it attains the usable status that KDE and Gnome work so hard for.

You should remember that is is tiny and a sub-200meg release like this is amazing for what it does include but that just doesn't cut the cream for any kind of general purpose computing.

Go to the PUD GNU/Linux project page

Grav

Written by Oli on Sunday, 29 April 2007. Tagged with linux, review. Read 8894 times. If you liked it, please give it a digg.

#1 /* 2 years, 8 months ago */
The atkins diet is really unhealthy for your heart and I think that can be applied to this release as an analagy. Gnome is already lightweight and Ubuntu is focused on usability and the experience; so stripping the parts that makes Ubuntu good is only going to result in "bad".

Nice first review though.
<a href="http://www.seopher.com" target="_blank">Seopher.com</a>
#2 — Author comment /* 2 years, 8 months ago */
I'm not sure I'd say Gnome is lightweight but I'd definitely agree the power of Ubuntu is its user-friendliness.

Why they chose this long way round (taking Ubuntu, removing Gnome, adding XFCE and stripping out all programs) rather than just starting with Xubuntu removing unneeded applications is beyond me.

I think the only time I can recommend something like this is where people have really really slow internet but need a XFCE desktop.
#3 /* 2 years, 8 months ago */
For windows users I would say that these are the best linux distros to use

Not in any sort of order
Linspire It isn't free but also not really expensive. Kinda windows like KDE setup.
Freespire Same as linspire but free
Ubuntu We all know about ubuntu and what its about.

I'm sure there are other Distros out there that lean towards windows users and ease of use but these 3 stand out the most to me. And now that Linspire and Freespire will be using a ubuntu base they should get even better.
Nate
#4 — Author comment /* 2 years, 8 months ago */
Yeah it's difficult to see how similar FreeSpire and Ubuntu are going to be because not only are they redoing the *Spires on Ubuntu but they're integrating some of the more popular things in FreeSpire (one-click-installs) into Ubuntu.

Whatever happens, I think its going to mean 3 distributions all getting exponentially better in just one release cycle. It will be interesting to see how the other distributions will keep up in this area.
#5 /* 2 years, 8 months ago */
Gnome is lightweight??? Now there's a good laugh: http://ktown.kde.org/~seli/memory/desktop_benchmark.html

Average difference: Gnome uses > 20% more ram than KDE!
#6 — Author comment /* 2 years, 8 months ago */
While I agree with the results, perhaps we should be careful about trusting figures from non-independent sources.

If CompanyX says they're n times better than CompanyY, does that mean it's fact? There's very little accountability in the FOSS world so individuals can come out with figures that prove something and the only real judgement is peer review. I'm sure there have been Gnome fans and developers saying how rubbish the stats are.

What really matters in most circumstances is how usable things are.

I've found from personal tests with XFCE, it just doesn't have enough features or configuration for a "power user" to cope. If they add much more, they add to the footprint and become like KDE or Gnome but I think in terms of how much they could improve, XFCE has the most exciting prospects. For example, if they could add all the admin features of the others and keep things as light, I would certainly have a much harder time turning my nose up at it.

But what matters in products like this is raw speed. As long as the underlying system can get everything auto-configured and you don't need any more applications, you're fine.
#7 /* 2 years, 8 months ago */
Hi, I'm the PUD GNU/Linux project leader, penk.

First of all, thanks for reviewing! :-)

We are always hoping for come into public notice, and any comments or questions will be very important during the development process. (eg. the i18n problem, the icons, and the selection of applications)

There are also some viewpoints we have to clarify.

1) PUD is not a strip-down Ubuntu

We use the packages and repostories from Ubuntu, but we have our own build script (called build-livecd, http://code.google.com/p/build-livecd/ ) and applications.

It's bottom up by that script rather than strip down or remaster from the official Ubuntu LiveCD. For instance, PUD is more like SLAX, which also created by the ""linux-live" script, but it's not a Slackware based distro.

Just because we start this project since the middle of 2004, so we didn't go with Xubuntu.

2) PUD is an extendable LiveCD

Due to the (kind of restricted) philosophy of "Not exceed 200MB", The main iso doesn't include a lot of pplications. But we have the plugin structure (just like SLAX or Puppy Linux), so it's easily to customize or add more application.

Here's a screenshot:
http://140.120.13.11/~s9356048/pud-20070503-custom-s.jpg

We are still working on it, also the bugs and drawbacks you mentioned above will be fix in the next release.

Thanks again! ;-)
penk <penkia@gmail.com>

Don't just sit there like a lemon! Reply!

Got something to say? Now's the time to share it with the author and everybody else that reads this posting! Lemons need not apply.

edtBOX - xHTML: yes - bbcode:no
Home | Advertise | About | Contact | Legal © Oli Warner 2001—2007 Proud 9rules member