Linux Is Not A "Second String" Operating System

4saken said:
save a chunk of money if you are willing to only use products that are about 25% as good as commercial alternatives.

eg gimp/etc/etc/etc.

inevitably you end up severely compromising and spending more time convincing yourself it was worth it to make the switch. For me, i use linux everyday at the workplace because it makes sense from the beginning for our jboss applications, email systems, etc etc.
Unless you are really hard on to save 100 bucks then there is no real good reason for an end user consumer to use linux over windows.
Click to expand...

Not taking infrastructure into account. Google corporate seems to be doing fine not using Windows for desktop. I do agree on your point on GIMP and what not being a poor alternative compared to Adobe's Photoshop. Who knows if they are using in house alternatives to replace applications commonly used within the Windows platform.
 
heatlesssun said:
Attainment costs are typically very small piece of the pie with software TCO. If that weren't true then Linux should have wiped out Windows years ago. In the late 90's many Linux backers thought that the rise of Linux on the desktop was inevitable because it was "free". The reality is nothing is free unless people are willing to work for free.

And Microsoft seems to be responsive to pricing for consumers this time. The cost of Windows 8 should work out to be about $1 per month per machine for the life of product assuming a 3 year flagship life for 8.

Wiping one's ass after shitting costs more. Windows 8 might be shit but it is cheaper than shitting.
Click to expand...

Microsoft colludes with PC manufacturers to force you to buy Windows. Most people never even see the cost of Windows because it is baked into the cost of the PC. Fortunately, the law allows you to get a refund for the cost of Windows by refusing the license and I have always been able to get one by speaking to the legal department.

It's nice that they are finally charging a reasonable price for consumers, I just wish they would do the same for businesses. Small and medium businesses get screwed with the outrageous price of software.
 
heatlesssun said:
Be prepared to take tablets off this list over the next year.
Click to expand...

LOL! Just like last year was the year of Windows 7 phones. This year is going to be the year of Windows tablets. MS and their fans have been saying that since Windows XP Tablet edition.
 
I like Linux and use it sparingly, tinkering around with a few distros every now and then. Mint, CentOS and Ubuntu are all part of my tinkering efforts, but my biggest reason to date for not going with it full time is stable printer drivers (or lack thereof). Seems like I have more issues there than anything... :rolleyes:
 
jpm100 said:
Everyone keeps saying this like the $50 upgrade:
a) can be used as a standalone product not requiring a Win7 disc (sources anyone?)
b) will last beyond the stated Jan 2013 time limit.
Click to expand...

http://windowsteamblog.com/windows/...07/02/upgrade-to-windows-8-pro-for-39-99.aspx

I believe that you must have a valid installation of Windows XP, Vista or 7 on the system drive but that you can chose to do a clean install. As far as going beyond January, that's not the case now but I kind of doubt that Microsoft is just going to jack up the prices after January 31, 2013 unless people can't get enough of Windows 8 and even I wouldn't say that will be the case. At any rate, one can buy the upgrade and use it later if they chose, $40 just isn't a lot of money

As Steam on Linux is a good thing for Linux users, isn't a cheaper version of Windows good for Windows?
 
heatlesssun said:
If you have proof of this then go to the DOJ or EU and wipe Microsoft off the face of the Earth.
Click to expand...

Secure UEFI.
You know, Apple can do this because it is their hardware; Apple can do whatever they want with it.

Microsoft can't, however, but yet they threaten other, 3rd party, companies with the fact of "if you don't sell your system with our software/OS, then we will cut all deals and current contracts with you, period."
Fuck you Microsoft.
 
BladeVenom said:
LOL! Just like last year was the year of Windows 7 phones. This year is going to be the year of Windows tablets. MS and their fans have been saying that since Windows XP Tablet edition.
Click to expand...

Not sure how Windows Phone 7 got into the conversation. Again I thought that the original conversation was about the number of Linux proper devices compared to Windows branded devices was what was being talked about. Android is a Linux kernel but does any Linux desktop distro run Android apps natively? Hell I can run most Android apps in Bluestacks on my Windows x86 tablets these days. Some of then even run well.

I'll say it again for the logically impaired. I've never said that Windows 8/RT devices would overtake Android devices in volume except at the higher end. Yes, I do think that the days of $200+ Android devices is done, the iPad already has destroyed Android at the higher end. And to this Windows and no one is going to buy anything other than cheap Android tablets.

There have been a number of surveys of the years about how dominate Macs are in the $1000+ laptop space, Windows 8 devices have that price range locked p.;)
 
pelo said:
You'd be surprised...
Click to expand...

OpenGL ftw, it's always been a better API.
Doom 3 was a testament to that.

DirectX is a horrible API that holds so much back from the raw hardware pushing the game/app.
DirectX and the 360 are the only things saving Microsoft in the gaming community any more.

Windows has its place, but as a gaming OS, its day has long since passed.
 
Thanks for the link pelo.
Quoted from here: http://www.extremetech.com/gaming/133824-valve-opengl-is-faster-than-directx-even-on-windows

Really, it all comes down to that crummy old thing we call the network effect — and, of course, monopolistic heft and marketing dollars. DirectX, because it has a cleaner API and better documentation, is easier to learn. More developers using DirectX = more DirectX games = better driver support. This is a vicious loop that again leads to more DX devs, more DX games, and better DX drivers/tools/documentation. Microsoft has relentlessly marketed DirectX, too — and who can forget the release of Windows Vista and Microsoft’s OpenGL smear campaign? Vista’s bundled version of OpenGL was completely crippled, forcing many devs to switch to DirectX.

Microsoft has good reason to hamper the progress of OpenGL, of course: While DirectX is proprietary and only runs on Windows, Xbox and Windows Phone, OpenGL is completely cross-platform. There are solid OpenGL implementations for Mac, Linux, PlayStation 3, Nintendo Wii, and just about every modern smartphone (OpenGL ES). It obviously in Microsoft’s best interests to ensure that the best gaming experiences are exclusive to its platforms.
Click to expand...

I could not have said it better.
I love how everyone hates Apple for all of their bullshit, considering they aren't nearly as bad as Microsoft.

The loathing for Microsoft and that damnable OS called Windows burns within the rages of my soul!
 
Red Falcon said:
OpenGL ftw, it's always been a better API.
Doom 3 was a testament to that.

DirectX is a horrible API that holds so much back from the raw hardware pushing the game/app.
DirectX and the 360 are the only things saving Microsoft in the gaming community any more.

Windows has its place, but as a gaming OS, its day has long since passed.
Click to expand...

Windows is a gaming platform, that's it. There's nothing else good about it. As soon as more people get over their intimidation of Linux and how it's not Windows, I'm sure Linux would gain an adequate amount of market share. No, that doesn't mean Linux will take over Windows... for the fearful, irate Winboiz.

Valve/Blizzard owns PC gaming, and I wouldn't be surprised if Blizzard jumped on the Linux portage bandwagon after Valve profiting from an untapped, hungry market that is more than willing to pay for quality games.
 
DX won't ever win out in the long run. It's worked up to this point simply because MS dictated the sole gaming market, but with their near-complete absence in the tablet/phone crowd and Apple gaining market share in the desktop (Linux too. Just under 2% discrete users now with more if you calculate the dual-booters), it only stands to reason that you need a cross-platform API that can be stretched across a variety of form factors.

Gaming companies can sell their games because phones are openGL, tablets have openGL, and desktop PCs are all openGL compliant. No need to muddle around with separate APIs in order to cover all 3 -- or 2 in reality. Most people aren't going to game on their smartphones quite like they will on tablets/PCs, but it's nevertheless compliant and possible.
 
Red Falcon said:
Secure UEFI.
You know, Apple can do this because it is their hardware; Apple can do whatever they want with it.

Microsoft can't, however, but yet they threaten other, 3rd party, companies with the fact of "if you don't sell your system with our software/OS, then we will cut all deals and current contracts with you, period."
Fuck you Microsoft.
Click to expand...

Uh, no. That's not coercing OEMs to sell Windows, just a requirement to run Windows. Considering the volume and power of Windows malware, good luck with that type of complaint.

You reap what you sow, and people for years and years and years and years complained about Windows malware. No one likes a hypocrites, You can't tell Microsoft to be hypersensitive about security and then complain about locking out competitors with a valid security protocol,
 
heatlesssun said:
Uh, no. That's not coercing OEMs to sell Windows, just a requirement to run Windows. Considering the volume and power of Windows malware, good luck with that type of complaint.

You reap what you sow, and people for years and years and years and years complained about Windows malware. No one likes a hypocrites, You can't tell Microsoft to be hypersensitive about security and then complain about locking out competitors with a valid security protocol,
Click to expand...

You can if it limits the use of other operating systems at the BIOS/hardware level. They even have to pay in order to get their names on the list.
 
bh192012 said:
Do you have some examples of when "it could not be further from." I have a feeling a DX developer will say it's too hard to use GL, and a GL programmer will say it's too hard to use DX.
Click to expand...
I don't doubt that some people are going to say that Direct3D is too hard to use in comparison with OpenGL. Some people feel that way. That said, the majority of people you'll talk to who've used both are going to tell you that (at least as of D3D10) Direct3D is an easier solution to work with, particularly now that cap bits have been gotten rid of. You don't need to concern yourself with the wide range of OpenGL features supported on some cards and not others, as Direct3D actually enforces compatibility with the feature sets Microsoft advertises. If you don't cover every base, you don't get WHQL certification for that feature level. It's an all-or-nothing game, which makes life dramatically easier on people. That's a pretty big deal.

As far as the API itself is concerned, there are lots of ugly things in OpenGL. Direct3D 10/11 will actually handle a lot of the device creation and swap creation for you, and it's painless to keep track of what's going on with the application window. It lets you handle device errors pretty gracefully, and the debugging facilities are generally pretty excellent. Once you get all of these things covered in your OpenGL implementation, you're in reasonably good shape, but just getting devices going, working and responding to issues entails a lot of nastiness. The way Direct3D and Windows itself are pretty tightly intertwined is a real advantage, because it just ends up making things easier.

OpenGL is also poorly-documented, comparatively speaking. Microsoft's never really excelled at documentation, but they do a damn sight better than the Khronos Group. From what I understand, it's getting better, but it probably still won't ever be there.

Red Falcon said:
DirectX is a horrible API that holds so much back from the raw hardware pushing the game/app.
Click to expand...
If that were true, I wouldn't bother with it. I'm pretty much the exact opposite of a Windows evangelist, but Microsoft is generally on the right side of the fence when it comes to DirectX. They deserve credit for that if for nothing else.
 
pelo said:
DX won't ever win out in the long run. It's worked up to this point simply because MS dictated the sole gaming market, but with their near-complete absence in the tablet/phone crowd and Apple gaining market share in the desktop (Linux too. Just under 2% discrete users now with more if you calculate the dual-booters), it only stands to reason that you need a cross-platform API that can be stretched across a variety of form factors.

Gaming companies can sell their games because phones are openGL, tablets have openGL, and desktop PCs are all openGL compliant. No need to muddle around with separate APIs in order to cover all 3 -- or 2 in reality. Most people aren't going to game on their smartphones quite like they will on tablets/PCs, but it's nevertheless compliant and possible.
Click to expand...

Dungeon defenders uses DirectX on PC...and was a phone game. Unreal Engine games use DirectX on PC with dx9/11 and can be ported to consoles where theyll use OpenGL, fairly automatically.
 
nOrVow said:
Windows is a gaming platform, that's it. There's nothing else good about it. As soon as more people get over their intimidation of Linux and how it's not Windows, I'm sure Linux would gain an adequate amount of market share. No, that doesn't mean Linux will take over Windows... for the fearful, irate Winboiz.
Click to expand...
We can only hope. :)
Also, I agree with you on Windows being a gaming platform and nothing more.

Even in enterprise settings, Windows is really a pain.
Every time one of our users has an issue, it's never Linux or OS X, it's always Windows.

If that were true, I wouldn't bother with it. I'm pretty much the exact opposite of a Windows evangelist, but Microsoft is generally on the right side of the fence when it comes to DirectX. They deserve credit for that if for nothing else.
Click to expand...
I only wish that were true.
DirectX is bloated, buggy, and looks and runs like crap compared to OpenGL.

Sure.
Click to expand...
Maybe you should read that article proving that cute little comment of yours wrong. :rolleyes:

That's not coercing OEMs to sell Windows, just a requirement to run Windows
Click to expand...
Let me get this straight, a firmware-level requirement, to run Windows, on hardware that isn't theirs. Wow.
How about Microsoft fix the software-level security holes/issues/problems/bugs before locking out OEMs and end-users because of the "wrong" firmware.

Every day Microsoft is trying to emulate and become more like Apple.
The only difference is that Apple has Apple-owned hardware; Microsoft is trying this, again, but I bet it blows up in their face just like it has every other time in the past.
 
DeathPrincess said:
Dungeon defenders uses DirectX on PC...and was a phone game. Unreal Engine games use DirectX on PC with dx9/11 and can be ported to consoles where theyll use OpenGL, fairly automatically.
Click to expand...

Porting can be done from either side, the point is using openGL as a base means you've got less work to do.

I find it amusing that some enthusiasts and gamers alike are defending Windows here. Correct me if I'm wrong, weren't they the ones that released a tablet OS that was bolted to a desktop OS then just this week gave us news of some unbelievably unbelievable touch-and-gesture-based mice and keyboards that will help you utilize said tablet OS?

Steam is looking to Linux and various other leading game studios have already shown disapproval towards MS's direction. Where the hell do you think they'll go next?
 
pelo said:
Porting can be done from either side, the point is using openGL as a base means you've got less work to do.

I find it amusing that some enthusiasts and gamers alike are defending Windows here. Correct me if I'm wrong, weren't they the ones that released a tablet OS that was bolted to a desktop OS then just this week gave us news of some unbelievably unbelievable touch-and-gesture-based mice and keyboards that will help you utilize said tablet OS?
Click to expand...

Damn that hardware looks like crap.
I agree, I can't believe people are defending Windows as a gaming OS.

Even Win 7 I could understand, but not Win 8, bleck.

Steam is looking to Linux and various other leading game studios have already shown disapproval towards MS's direction. Where the hell do you think they'll go next?
Click to expand...
HP-UX and AIX. :D
 
pelo said:
Porting can be done from either side, the point is using openGL as a base means you've got less work to do.
Click to expand...

Not in the UDK, it's pretty much an option on the way out, and a fuckton of people make games with it. The point is OpenGL>DirectX conversion isn't a problem that most people are going to have to face, so it's a non issue, it's transparent. Using popular SDKs, I can make a game for DirectX and then automatically convert it for OpenGL platforms. I don't have to touch OpenGL or DirectX ever. I can have my PC game use DX and then 2 clicks and I have a mobile/console game using OpenGL. So the extra work is only for engine makers, not for developers.

Most SDKs and engines use DirctX, why do you think that is? They probably tend to go for DirectX because it's first to market with lots of things (tesselation for one was in DirectX SDKs in 2008/9, then took 1-2 years to be added to OpenGL 4.0). OpenGL is exactly pushing any envelopes. Nor is it a common term. People know we're on DX11, but do as many know whatversion of OpenGL we're on? "Using OpenGL 4.2" is hardly a selling point.

My name is not Heatlesssun. I am not a fan of WIndows 8 because of it's direction and uglyness. Same reason I don't game on Linux, it doesn't suit my purpose. :p
 
Red Falcon said:
I agree, I can't believe people are defending Windows as a gaming OS.

Even Win 7 I could understand, but not Win 8, bleck.
Click to expand...

What's even more surprising is some of the dumbass comments that Steam/Linux thread had.

As a game developer, particularly one that develops with the desktop in mind, the fact that windows 8 veers away from your average desktop enthusiast, aka your entire market as a desktop game developer, and molds itself into a hybrid OS thing means that Microsoft is going in the exact opposite direction that your business is based on. Of course Steam is going to be looking elsewhere when Microsoft themselves are looking elsewhere.

Built-in app store with "certification" features.

Touch-based OS combined with a typical desktop OS.

Touch-based peripherals.

A single OS (Metro) to stretch itself across all devices.

Nothing new from DX12 (though we'll find out this month I hope)

You can't say that game developers are confident with Microsoft's new direction.
 
Most SDKs and engines use DirctX, why do you think that is? They probably tend to go for DirectX because it's first to market with lots of things (tesselation for one was in DirectX SDKs in 2008/9, then took 1-2 years to be added to OpenGL 4.0). OpenGL is exactly pushing any envelopes. Nor is it a common term. People know we're on DX11, but do as many know whatversion of OpenGL we're on? "Using OpenGL 4.2" is hardly a selling point.
Click to expand...

That really doesn't matter when essentially every "new PC game" is running a near 10-year-old API. Developers are gunning for a way to target the widest audience, not for new features. If they were, we'd have more than one BF3-like game a year.

And it's an advantage I noted before but skipped over in the above post.

openGL compliant hardware stretches across OSes, hardware, and form factors. Something that can't be said for DX unless it's in some way tied to Microsoft.
 
pelo said:
openGL compliant hardware stretches across OSes, hardware, and form factors. Something that can't be said for DX unless it's in some way tied to Microsoft.
Click to expand...

Microsoft should use Nintendo's old slogan:
Get_N_or_Get_Out.jpg


Just replace the 'N' with an 'M' and they're golden. :D
 
Red Falcon said:
Secure UEFI.
You know, Apple can do this because it is their hardware; Apple can do whatever they want with it.

Microsoft can't, however, but yet they threaten other, 3rd party, companies with the fact of "if you don't sell your system with our software/OS, then we will cut all deals and current contracts with you, period."
Fuck you Microsoft.
Click to expand...

OEMs *asked* MS to do it this way, because it makes accounting easier. Another point, is that before MS did this other OSes were no more common than now (perhaps they are even more common now), and I highly doubt anyone would go non-MS because the price was increased more, OEMs would still default to Windows, the user would still get it by default, and then the OEMs would have a lot more work to do paying for and accounting for each copy of Windows individually. It's a fantasy to think eliminating volume discounts would change anything.
 
pelo said:
You can if it limits the use of other operating systems at the BIOS/hardware level. They even have to pay in order to get their names on the list.
Click to expand...

SecureBoot mandates an enable/disable option for x86 hardware. If you're talking about ARM tablets..why would you buy a Windows 8 tablet if you wanted to run android/linux/chrome/etc. Just buy a tablet that runs those OSes. The way I see it, MS wants at least one device in the market that has the built in security of iOS, while still letting OEMs produce versions of it to keep them happy. Far more arguing on this than is warranted, imo.
 
devil22 said:
SecureBoot mandates an enable/disable option for x86 hardware. If you're talking about ARM tablets..why would you buy a Windows 8 tablet if you wanted to run android/linux/chrome/etc. Just buy a tablet that runs those OSes. The way I see it, MS wants at least one device in the market that has the built in security of iOS, while still letting OEMs produce versions of it to keep them happy. Far more arguing on this than is warranted, imo.
Click to expand...

That is not enough.

The only acceptable setup is one in which I, the user, have the master key needed to sign bootloaders to run on MY computer.

The user, and not the OEM or Microsoft, should decide what is and isn't to be trusted.
 
damicatz said:
The user, and not the OEM or Microsoft, should decide what is and isn't to be trusted.
Click to expand...

Exactly.
Apparently devil22 wants to be controlled; he should buy an Apple system and be happy with it. :rolleyes:
 
damicatz said:
That is not enough.

The only acceptable setup is one in which I, the user, have the master key needed to sign bootloaders to run on MY computer.

The user, and not the OEM or Microsoft, should decide what is and isn't to be trusted.
Click to expand...

Red Falcon said:
Exactly.
Apparently devil22 wants to be controlled; he should buy an Apple system and be happy with it. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

So the average user won't be able to deal with Windows 8 because the Start Button & Menu are gone but they'd be perfectly good with signing bootloaders?
 
heatlesssun said:
Linux sucks.
Click to expand...

uh oh.. you crossed the line heatless.. i never bothered before because youre just some marketing goon, its pointless to argue with ads but.. now you managed to draw my attention, it was you and Oled but now you upped yourself with only two words, congrats..
 
Lol Linux does suck for the desktop. Most people will freak out if they used Linux because they have no idea what the difference is. If anything people in general are technology idiots and I think this has been proved over and over. They just want something that they are familiar and works right the first time with the software that they are used to. And no Linux is not a second string OS, having less than 1% of the market share on the desktop means for all intents and purposes its not even there.
 
corrupted223 said:
Lol Linux does suck for the desktop. Most people will freak out if they used Linux because they have no idea what the difference is. If anything people in general are technology idiots and I think this has been proved over and over. They just want something that they are familiar and works right the first time with the software that they are used to. And no Linux is not a second string OS, having less than 1% of the market share on the desktop means for all intents and purposes its not even there.
Click to expand...

such ignorant bullshit. Go to YouTube and watch the videos people post of "technological idiots" trying Linux for the first time then trying Windows 8 for the first time.

Linux has had user friendliness down pat for years now and Microsoft has taken huge steps backwards.

And lol at market share numbers as your argument. Kind of stupid to compare operating systems by sales then point at the one that's free and say stupid shit about its market share...
 
Maybe market share wasnt the right wording but usage share. According to wikipedia its hovering around 1.1-1.6%. Not counting anything else since we were talking about desktop enviroments. So the point still stands. Plenty of OEM's have tried to sell desktop/laptop systems with some version of Linux on them and couldnt move them.
 
corrupted223 said:
Maybe market share wasnt the right wording but usage share. According to wikipedia its hovering around 1.1-1.6%. Not counting anything else since we were talking about desktop enviroments. So the point still stands. Plenty of OEM's have tried to sell desktop/laptop systems with some version of Linux on them and couldnt move them.
Click to expand...

Except in Asia.
 
What is different in Asia? Is it because of low incomes there that it is more attractive or easier to get? I understand how that would make a difference.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top