I admit I use Puppy occasionally, but I prefer VL if the system can run it. I not doubt about Puppy's goodies, as I said, its great.When I judge an os, I try to see the order, efficiency and stability of the design, as far as my knowledge permits (sadly is not too much). That said, Puppy would be my second choice after VL. The configuration tools are great, and as you said, it works out of the box.
I think vl cant run "out of the box" in a lower than 128megs machine. Puppy can.
I hope I didn't offend you
, I love Puppy, but if I can, I run vl. In a very low end machine, I use Puppy. If I have a hi-end machine, no vl available, and I have to choose between puppy, and the fashioned, glossy, latest linux or windows, I choose Puppy
I believe this is a common misconception about Puppy, that it is suitable only for challenged hardware.
VL is a victim of that misconception too, I think VL and Puppy are good by design, I don't like to waste resources just because I have them.