Porteus linux on the net or on the waves of the web

[francois]

I am not surprised at all. Great catch!

Maybe experienced user could go and comment the last review that was posted on distrowatch:
https://distrocrunch.com/porteus-linux-a-quick-review/

Cheers!

[francois]

Very interesting review about porteus. The author goes into details concerning the installation. A good pros and cons as a conclusion.

[Ed_P]

Very interesting review about porteus.

5.0 rc2

[francois]

porteus rc1, though very recent.

Here is the link:
https://fitzcarraldoblog.wordpress.com/ ... ifference/

A conaisseur!

[Rava]

Porteus with the position 8º as best USB distro for this year 2021
https://www.techradar.com/uk/best/best-linux-distros

I checked, and in 2022 (as in: right now) it seems the same, 8th position and "Best Linux distro for USB"
Does anyone have a screenshot (e.g. via archive.org) of https://www.techradar.com/uk/best/best-linux-distros as it was in 2021 - my question is, did they update the position or description of any other distros? Is it just a coincidence that Port is in the very same position with the very same description?

Added in 4 minutes 57 seconds:
The 2022 page claims " By Mayank Sharma last updated 8 May 22 " but the ranking is the very same than in Jan 2021:
https://web.archive.org/web/20210107125 ... ux-distros
Quite fishy if you ask me… with a ranking of 18 entries, how can the ranking be the very same than 1 1/2 years ago?

[francois]

Very good reviews on distrowatch about porteus 5.0. They are worth to be read except the the outlying porteus hater or misundertanding occasional user.
https://distrowatch.com/dwres.php?resou ... ro=porteus

[Rava]

Very good reviews on distrowatch about porteus 5.0. They are worth to be read except the the outlying porteus hater or misundertanding occasional user.
https://distrowatch.com/dwres.php?resou ... ro=porteus

[ s strike-through above by me]

Is is in lieu with their review policy to write a review praising Port in objective way, but also reviewing the most glaring incorrect review of others
"some points have been brought up that are most probably due to misunderstandings like:
point A * explanation
point B * other explanation
etcetera pp"

Calling all "most probably due to misunderstandings" should be objective, correct?
Even when someone is obviously a hater who makes illogical claims - calling someone a hater is very less objective and is not helping when handling trolls or haters anyway.

[francois]

Hi rava,

About negative comments of users:
Let's state that both affirmation are judgments. Facts would be reporting what he wrote about his porteus experience. But I agree that hater is a more extreme judgment than misunderstanding occasional user.
About positive comments of users:
It is good to read what they see in porteus as a distribution. Some comments describe really well my own experience and I suppose the shared experience of the porteus lovers and regular users. But sometimes, they are revealing some aspects of porteus that I did not think about.

Cordiallement,

[francois]

Two very recent reviews for porteus 5.0:
1) First of six articles
https://linuxnewbiesince1996.com/2022/0 ... -11-users/
2) Slax vs porteus
https://pocketmags.com/us/linux-format- ... orteus-5-0

[Rava]

1) First of six articles
https://linuxnewbiesince1996.com/2022/0 ... -11-users/

Nope, it's the final and 6th post of the series - but it lists the prior 5 posts.

The first is this:
https://linuxnewbiesince1996.com/2022/0 ... -hoorah-o/

2nd to 5th are called
https://linuxnewbiesince1996.com/2022/0 ... plus-ext4/
https://linuxnewbiesince1996.com/2022/0 ... tallation/
https://linuxnewbiesince1996.com/2022/0 ... wser-tool/
https://linuxnewbiesince1996.com/2022/0 ... breoffice/

[Rava]

2) Slax vs porteus
https://pocketmags.com/us/linux-format- ... orteus-5-0

Most probably again due to my weird internet I could not access the 2nd link - and since it was not available on archive.org I manually saved it.
Here it is for it to stay:
https://web.archive.org/web/20220825212 ... orteus-5-0

[francois]

This last link that you report is working for me.
Thanks.

[nanZor]

Bummer - Porteus 5.0 gets a poor review on Distrowatch:

https://distrowatch.com/weekly.php?issu ... 19#porteus

At first I was kind of miffed, but I realized that one would have to play 30 questions with the reviewer to find out what *HE* did wrong.

I've had no problems with persistence as he states. The lowest common denominator is to use the savefile manager, create the file, and point Porteus to it by EDITING the porteus.cfg file. (Or manually direct it during boot by altering the append line). It shouldn't take the author a couple of weeks to not find this standard solution.

Other issues were brought up, that I've had no problems with, but in the end, I think the author just doesn't understand the raison d'etre that makes Porteus different from all the "burn the iso, and hit the app-store / package manager and load 'er up" mentality.

Just saying - I don't want the devs and other contributors to Porteus to feel down. Some just don't get it, and it isn't their cup of tea.

It's too bad the author didn't seem to take the time to ask for help or guidance from us here prior to posting the poor review.

[francois]

It is not the first time that distrowatch puts on a reviewer with that type of attitude towards porteus.

The general rating of users of porteus is 8.6/10 at the end of that purported official review. And only the seldom user comes with such a negative review of our distribution.

This Jeff Siegel did not even read these comments before or after testing porteus 5.0.This a poor job.

[fanthom]

Just 3 weeks ago DistroWatch wrote about "immutable operating systems" and they do not list Slax or Porteus in particular:
https://distrowatch.com/weekly.php?issue=20220829#qa

I may be mistaken but Slax was very first with this approach ... Its a shame it was not mentioned.


Porteus reviewer missed one point: Slax/Porteus can be installed on a FAT/NTFS formatted removable media. Do you know any other linux which can do this?
Persistence cannot be enabled out of the box because FAT/NTFS are not handling file permissions and ownership properly.

Why we want to run Porteus on a FAT filesystem? Because the system is portable and usually installed on the USB stick. USB device can be used for carrying other files (docs, PDFs, audio/video) which can be accessed under Windows/Unix/OSX, etc. You do not need two USB sticks: one with Porteus and other carrying other files - you just can use a single USB device for both use cases.

Also - I do not like persistence at all. I prefer to keep everything in a read-only modules and have a full control over 'every single file' which is present the system.
This is a geek-ish way of using an OS and I understand its not suitable for everybody.
(to be honest Porteus with its modular and layered approach was never easy to understand for the newcomers)

Thanks