Linus Tech Tips: "Linux Gaming Finally Doesn't Suck"

If you're a Linux user or don't want to use Windows or a Mac yes one can certainly game on Linux. If the support is there for your title sweet. But for the foreseeable future even with Windows compatibility tech it's always going to be a hit or miss situation. That's not good enough for average gamers who simply want to play games.
Do you have Google alerts set up for "Linux" and "Windows" or do you just F5 all day to be on the forefront of shitting on Linux and praising MS?
 
This is the typical response if I talk about my issues with getting questions answered, I've seen it nearly verbatim so many times. I've done a ton of shit in Linux, I used custom kernels for years for folding. I'm not a complete amateur and a make sure to phrase my questions appropriately. I get the same level of response though, which is why I said what I did. Now if I can't find the answers by searching I simply don't bother because getting teeth pulled with rusty pliers is more fun than trying to get help.

The absolute superiority complex of the people who know is staggering. They seem to forget they weren't born with the knowledge in their head.

I really want this to work, because I love a lot of things about Linux. I love the customization and ability to make the OS as lightweight as you want. I love the freedom from MS telling you that you can only do it their way and changing things arbitrarily with their updates (ex - I used to shut off access to radios, microphones, etc with the sliders but suddenly now you can't use teamspeak or discord without it on). I just have a limited amount of time to play with stuff like this, and if I can't get an answer of some kind even if it is that hardware is incompatible and I need to change something in a timely manner I might as well not bother.

I have to say, that even when I was starting out with Linux I never encountered this. In fact I see just as much hostility from Windows users as I do Linux users.

Perhaps the Arch community can be a little over the top? It's been a while since I've used an Arch based distro so I really can't comment.
 
No, you're being outwardly negative, almost like you have some innate fear of people switching sides.

They aren't switching sides in the context of gaming if they are using Windows compatibility tech to run Windows games. In a way they're reinforcing the reason why people game on Windows in the first place.

Claiming that gamers can't install alternate operating systems is about as far from realistic as anyone can get.


The average person using a PC has not the desire or technical experience to install Linux. That's not to say they can't if they want to learn but at that point they are no longer average PC users.

And you're right, the popularity of Windows is solely due to the fact that it's highly unlikely you're going to buy a device that doesn't have it pre installed from the factory. Problem is, that by no means indicates that it's a fantastic operating system or that people even like it. Considering the popularity of Android and mobile devices, I think that's evidence that people have issues with Windows as an operating system and have found something better with less issues that suits their busy lives.

Android isn't a desktop OS. And yes in their busy lives people aren't looking to have to acquire skills like installing Linux on their PCs when what they have already works.
 
Do you have Google alerts set up for "Linux" and "Windows" or do you just F5 all day to be on the forefront of shitting on Linux and praising MS?

It's just some of this stuff gets crazy, like average PC users wanting to get into something as complex as installing Linux. And yeah that can get very damned complicated and screw up a lot of stuff if you don't know what the hell you're doing. Hell the average PC user doesn't even make backups.
 
They aren't switching sides in the context of gaming if they are using Windows compatibility tech to run Windows games. In a way they're reinforcing the reason why people game on Windows in the first place.

No, they're making the decision to shift away from an operating system with problems. Linux is no harder to install than Windows and I'm quite sure the average casual gamer has the aptitude to do it, they're far from stupid in most cases.

The fact that Android is not a desktop OS is irrelevant, Android is globally more popular than Windows on computing devices and that's all that matters. There is no doubting that a great many people are over Windows and I don't think Microsoft cares.
 
No, they're making the decision to shift away from an operating system with problems. Linux is no harder to install than Windows and I'm quite sure the average casual gamer has the aptitude to do it, they're far from stupid in most cases.

Linux has its own problems. Clearly when it comes to gaming there are issues otherwise there wouldn't be the need to add Windows compatibility tech to help make Linux usable for gaming purposes.

If Windows were that problematic then someone would have tried to develop a PC gaming platform FREE OF WINDOWS. Oh that's right, Valve tried for over five years and that went nowhere thus the need to add to Windows compatibility tech to prevent Linux PC gaming from becoming completely irrelevant in PC gaming.

You keep referring to the aptitude of casual PC gamers. Why would a casual PC gaming go through the trouble of installing Linux just to run Windows games that already work perfectly fine?

The fact that Android is not a desktop OS is irrelevant, Android is globally more popular than Windows on computing devices and that's all that matters. There is no doubting that a great many people are over Windows and I don't think Microsoft cares.

Since there aren't any gaming PCs running Android not sure how Android is relevant here.
 
Last edited:
Linux has its own problems. Clearly when it comes to gaming there are issues otherwise there wouldn't be the need to add Windows compatibility tech to help make Linux usable for gaming purposes.

Well, we've been over this. Windows has contained within it's numerous layers a DLL layer that can quite easily be used to translate system calls to the Linux kernel in the same way it can be used to translate system calls to the NT kernel. It's not about 'compatibility' it's all about 'translation'.

As for Linux issues, every OS has issues, it's just that Windows has vastly more issues than any other OS out there and people are beginning to notice it.

Since there aren't any gaming PCs running Android not sure how Android is relevant here.

Just as well my context was relating to operating systems, the average user and not specifically gamers and their gaming PC's then.
 
It's just some of this stuff gets crazy, like average PC users wanting to get into something as complex as installing Linux. And yeah that can get very damned complicated and screw up a lot of stuff if you don't know what the hell you're doing. Hell the average PC user doesn't even make backups.

We've shifted away from 'gamers', to 'casual gamers' and now we're discussing 'the average user'? Is there anything beyond the average user?
 
Well, we've been over this. Windows has contained within it's numerous layers a DLL layer that can quite easily be used to translate system calls to the Linux kernel in the same way it can be used to translate system calls to the NT kernel. It's not about 'compatibility' it's all about 'translation'.

Still Windows programs that a pretty much guaranteed to work on Windows where on Linux maybe they do or don't and generally no developer support if they don't.

As for Linux issues, every OS has issues, it's just that Windows has vastly more issues than any other OS out there and people are beginning to notice it.

Vastly more issues? If desktop Linux were installed on hundreds of millions of PCs there'd be vastly more issues than being used by a niche of expert users.
 
We've shifted away from 'gamers', to 'casual gamers' and now we're discussing 'the average user'? Is there anything beyond the average user?

I was just discussing the Linus video and what's in it that would be compelling to average gamers to make them want to use Linux for gaming. It might be compelling to Linux fans. For people that can already run Windows games, not so much.
 
This is the typical response if I talk about my issues with getting questions answered, I've seen it nearly verbatim so many times. I've done a ton of shit in Linux, I used custom kernels for years for folding. I'm not a complete amateur and a make sure to phrase my questions appropriately. I get the same level of response though, which is why I said what I did. Now if I can't find the answers by searching I simply don't bother because getting teeth pulled with rusty pliers is more fun than trying to get help.

The absolute superiority complex of the people who know is staggering. They seem to forget they weren't born with the knowledge in their head.

I really want this to work, because I love a lot of things about Linux. I love the customization and ability to make the OS as lightweight as you want. I love the freedom from MS telling you that you can only do it their way and changing things arbitrarily with their updates (ex - I used to shut off access to radios, microphones, etc with the sliders but suddenly now you can't use teamspeak or discord without it on). I just have a limited amount of time to play with stuff like this, and if I can't get an answer of some kind even if it is that hardware is incompatible and I need to change something in a timely manner I might as well not bother.

I think what a lot of people overlook is that online "help" communities for pretty much any OS including windows suck.

I'm not saying you won't get the odd rude or unsympathetic reply on a lot of Linux distros official forums ect. Of course you will... I think people just over look the simple fact that you get the same type of responses on third party (and sometimes MS own) online help options.

People seem to forget that that they where not born with windows knowledge in their heads as well. ;) Trying to get help online for obscure problems for any OS in general sucks ass. The average windows users with out a geek friend too help them that has ventured online for help have come away with the same views. The only difference is many of those poor average windows users have paid actual money for the shite support.

Every OS has its issues... and when you learn how to work around them, that knowledge rarely translates to another OS.

I get that you have some Linux experience. I'm not saying whatever your issue was, could have been fixed easily or anything. This isn't aimed at you, just a general comment. Very few people are honestly willing to be Humble students. When it comes to "PCs" or "Gaming" or whatever a person considers themselves to be an expert or semi expert or "old pro" with, sometimes its very hard for those types of people to start at zero and build. Don't get me wrong if your a windows power user you have a leg up becoming a Linux power user over someone completely new... if your willing to check the ego and accept you need to learn some stuff. In a lot of ways power users switchers are the biggest PITA to help. Its sort of like when your hiring someone for a semi technical job... sometimes its easier to hire someone that knows nothing and teach them, as they can accept they need to learn.

Too the topic at hand though. Linux has come a very long way in making sure new Linux and average type PC users have a decent experience. The major distros all install easier then ever... although I'm a huge fan of the command line and lament the move to GUIs 100% for average people (that was a mistake imo) regardless the need to use the Terminal is zero for most of the major distros. Steam has been a big pusher of that in as far as gaming goes. For the last few years installing steamos approved games from the Linux steam launcher has been a simple click and go... the few issues you hear are always distro related and in general the major non-Ubuntu distros have all solved those issues. Now steam play is brand new... Valve has been pushing the idea for around a year internally but have only went public beta with it recently. Give it some time to mature (its only a month or two old)... my bet would be that by Xmas 70-90% of windows games will launch and that by next summer 70-90% will run with next to no performance hit at all. 10% or so may never work due to DRM... and so be it really.
 
Vastly more issues? If desktop Linux were installed on hundreds of millions of PCs there'd be vastly more issues than being used by a niche of expert users.

Android, ChromeOS, and to a degree MacOS don't agree with you. Now in fairness MacOS is a *nix system but clearly not an open one.

I'm sorry but the whole... "if more people used it would have more problems" Is FUD pure and simple. It is just as silly as... "if more people used Linux there would be more Linux viruses." Nope no, there would not be. *nix has been the bigger target for years already... online servers, datacenters, most of the cloud, and most everyones phone is running some version of *nix. Yet still the biggest threats are always running on the one terrible OS that is taking forever to kill, err I mean die off.

Now in fairness, in another thread recently I linked some basic security info in regards to admin rights. MS has pushed proper user account setup for a few years now... and their strongest push got massive push back. To this day way to many windows experts, paid consultants, and power users for some unknown reason are too stupid to understand you can't be running on an admin privileged account all the damn time.
https://www.computerworld.com/artic...-vulnerabilities-can-be-easily-mitigated.html
94% or so of all windows attacks would go no where if everyone using windows just smarted up.

I can't count how many times I have consulted with smaller and some not so small business clients and seen the pure crap security wise windows setups they have paid good money for. A lot of windows professionals need to be flogged.
 
  • Like
Reactions: blkt
like this
I was just discussing the Linus video and what's in it that would be compelling to average gamers to make them want to use Linux for gaming. It might be compelling to Linux fans. For people that can already run Windows games, not so much.

Which is where you're wrong. You obsess over Windows, your fascination with Microsoft is literally off the scales, no one else I have ever had discussions like this with even comes close to your incredible need to rationalize the issues surrounding Windows not to mention your compulsive desire to crush any positive discussion regarding Linux.

As stated, I believe that with the exception of your fan club, most here are tired of your repetitive rantings and very few people actually take them seriously anymore.

Gamers are not stupid. Gamers are not shallow. Many are sick of the issues surrounding Windows and I see many jumping ship as a result. You may not see it, and for obvious reasons I don't expect you to, but it's happening.

It's obvious you don't like that one bit. Take a breath, let people make their own decisions.
 
You obsess over Windows

This is hilarious with all of the Linux fans going nuts over Windows compatibly tech in the Linux Steam client and then pretending that Windows applications are some now how "cross-platform". The obsessive hate that some you guys have over Windows is off the chain.
 
This is hilarious with all of the Linux fans going nuts over Windows compatibly tech in the Linux Steam client and then pretending that Windows applications are some now how "cross-platform". The obsessive hate that some you guys have over Windows is off the chain.

There are plenty of good reasons to hate Microsoft. Microsoft have held PC gaming back for years... they have hurt game development. They have hurt all development. Now I'm not saying the world would have been better off with IBM or Apple or Commodore or some other player in charge instead. Their aggressive destruction of better products from smaller players, their willful destruction of industry standards and countless other negative actions have cost us all. I won't miss windows proper when MS finally turns it into a *nix DE... and I doubt anyone will miss that when it goes either.

Microsoft has done such a disservice to the world that, seemingly intelligent educated on the subject folks such as yourself. No longer understand how software works. Linux Mac Windows Solaris Geode Beos and software running on pretty much any other Operating System since the mid 1970s has been written in the EXACT same language. C is the universal language of software.

As systems have gotten more complicated yes software has to call external libraries of standard functions more often. In the 70s the same C software could be compiled on basically ANY system with a C compiler with no changes at all. In the 80s came the GUIs.... and software started calling those standard GUI libraries... and became less portable. Still the core of the software didn't change... what the program did was still written in C and still could be compiled by any ASCI C compiler. To compile it for a different system involved finding all the specific API _flags and replacing them with X or Y systems version of the same _flag and calling the other library. It really wasn't all that difficult, as at that point most systems only had a handful of APIs. In the 90s MS started pushing tons of library functions that where mostly pointless... and seem to serve no other purpose then to make it as hard as possible to switch out libraries and recompile for other systems. Then they went even further and started extending APIs... giving developers very nebulous function calls which where next to impossible to port without rewriting code almost completely. Good business perhaps.... terrible for the industry no doubt. (they got called out when they tried it with web standards imo because more people could easily understand and work with web code)

I know that history isn't relevant to this thread... but yes heatle. The programming world has fought back against MS. Major developers (like Valve) have made a point of doing everything they can to get back to the way it was in the 1970s. We want to be able to take our programs... and simply compile them for any system without having to spend a month re writing API calls and debugging all the potential F ups because X or Y system library does something different then its documentation states. The open source community has fought the fight by introducing tons of completely OPEN frameworks thinks like QT / Vulkan ect... even windows old school MS boosters like Adobe are using frameworks like QT now instead of basically keeping 2 code paths (one windows one mac, now they keep ONE code path which uses the QT framework and compile for either system).

MS tried to control the entire software industry and finally it is backfiring on them. Its going to take years still but believe me when I say the vast majority of software developers have pushed for what will in the end be the end of MS as a monolithic monopolistic OS entity.
 
Last edited:
This is hilarious with all of the Linux fans going nuts over Windows compatibly tech in the Linux Steam client and then pretending that Windows applications are some now how "cross-platform". The obsessive hate that some you guys have over Windows is off the chain.

Who cares what Linux users think? Let them think whatever they want to think. I know personally I do not think of titles running under Proton as cross platform, but I enjoy running the Proton supported titles I have and I understand why Valve are pushing the technology. I am fascinated in what Valve have achieved.

I still have more native titles than Proton compatible titles however.
 
There are plenty of good reasons to hate Microsoft. Microsoft have held PC gaming back for years... they have hurt game development. They have hurt all development. Now I'm not saying the world would have been better off with IBM or Apple or Commodore or some other player in charge instead. Their aggressive destruction of better products from smaller players, their willful destruction of industry standards and countless other negative actions have cost us all. I won't miss windows proper when MS finally turns it into a *nix DE... and I doubt anyone will miss that when it goes either.

Microsoft has done such a disservice to the world that, seemingly intelligent educated on the subject folks such as yourself. No longer understand how software works. Linux Mac Windows Solaris Geode Beos and software running on pretty much any other Operating System since the mid 1970s has been written in the EXACT same language. C is the universal language of software.

As systems have gotten more complicated yes software has to call external libraries of standard functions more often. In the 70s the same C software could be compiled on basically ANY system with a C compiler with no changes at all. In the 80s came the GUIs.... and software started calling those standard GUI libraries... and became less portable. Still the core of the software didn't change... what the program did was still written in C and still could be compiled by any ASCI C compiler. To compile it for a different system involved finding all the specific API _flags and replacing them with X or Y systems version of the same _flag and calling the other library. It really wasn't all that difficult, as at that point most systems only had a handful of APIs. In the 90s MS started pushing tons of library functions that where mostly pointless... and seem to serve no other purpose then to make it as hard as possible to switch out libraries and recompile for other systems. Then they went even further and started extending APIs... giving developers very nebulous function calls which where next to impossible to port without rewriting code almost completely. Good business perhaps.... terrible for the industry no doubt. (they got called out when they tried it with web standards imo because more people could easily understand and work with web code)

I know that history isn't relevant to this thread... but yes heatle. The programming world has fought back against MS. Major developers (like Valve) have made a point of doing everything they can to get back to the way it was in the 1970s. We want to be able to take our programs... and simply compile them for any system without having to spend a month re writing API calls and debugging all the potential F ups because X or Y system library does something different then its documentation states. The open source community has fought the fight by introducing tons of completely OPEN frameworks thinks like QT / Vulkan ect... even windows old school MS boosters like Adobe are using frameworks like QT now instead of basically keeping 2 code paths (one windows one mac, now they keep ONE code path which uses the QT framework and compile for either system).

MS tried to control the entire software industry and finally it is backfiring on them. Its going to take years still but believe me when I say the vast majority of software developers have pushed for what will in the end be the end of MS as a monolithic monopolistic OS entity.

I can't agree. I don't know how Microsoft has held back PC Gaming when it created Direct X. Their worse offense is that it supported more features than Open GL. Back in the day it was buggy, but I can't remember a bug attributed directly to Direct X since before Windows XP. They created Thrustmaster gaming peripherals when the market produced mostly garbage. External libraries make sense. When you have many applications using the same features, it makes sense to store them in a library rather than clone those features inside every application. Could you imagine everything within the Direct X Library being contained within each game? Back in the 70s C was so portable because everything was a console program. If you didn't have a graphics library, your game would only work on the graphics cards your game was specifically programmed for.

Where Microsoft took gaming downhill was when they were pushing .NET. And that only had a small effect as it probably impacted Indy Gaming more than anything. The XNA framework was ridiculous, and high level languages were not able to use regular DirectX if I recall. That's when so many other high level platforms took off such as GameMaker and Unity.
 
No, you're being outwardly negative, almost like you have some innate fear of people switching sides. Claiming that gamers can't install alternate operating systems is about as far from realistic as anyone can get.

And you're right, the popularity of Windows is solely due to the fact that it's highly unlikely you're going to buy a device that doesn't have it pre installed from the factory. Problem is, that by no means indicates that it's a fantastic operating system or that people even like it. Considering the popularity of Android and mobile devices, I think that's evidence that people have issues with Windows as an operating system and have found something better with less issues that suits their busy lives.

So, on the one hand, it does not mean Windows is a fantastic OS. On the other hand, Android being popular means it is a fantastic OS? I find most folks are on Android because it is either that or buy an expensive iPhone. Learning Linux for a professional purpose or just to enjoy doing things is good. Trying to stick it to the man or playing Windows games in Linux means you still need Windows. Oh well, having fun is fine but a majority will still use Windows for gaming, among other things, even if it is Windows 7.
 
I can't agree. I don't know how Microsoft has held back PC Gaming when it created Direct X. Their worse offense is that it supported more features than Open GL. Back in the day it was buggy, but I can't remember a bug attributed directly to Direct X since before Windows XP. They created Thrustmaster gaming peripherals when the market produced mostly garbage. External libraries make sense. When you have many applications using the same features, it makes sense to store them in a library rather than clone those features inside every application. Could you imagine everything within the Direct X Library being contained within each game? Back in the 70s C was so portable because everything was a console program. If you didn't have a graphics library, your game would only work on the graphics cards your game was specifically programmed for.

Where Microsoft took gaming downhill was when they were pushing .NET. And that only had a small effect as it probably impacted Indy Gaming more than anything. The XNA framework was ridiculous, and high level languages were not able to use regular DirectX if I recall. That's when so many other high level platforms took off such as GameMaker and Unity.
Microsoft greatly helped PC gaming from the mid 90s to the early 2000s. What you're saying is all correct. Once they launched the Xbox was when they started to hinder it. Some off the top of my head:

-Took all the resources from Microsoft Game Studios that were putting out some decent PC games and dumped them into Xbox. Their stream of decent games on PC all but stopped after that.
-Tied DirectX 10 adoption to Vista unnecessarily at a time when most people were still on XP, which ensured it never had widespread adoption. There were maybe 2-3 games that required DX10? Contrast that with DX9, which supported 98, 2000, XP, and thus led to games requiring it within a year.
-Games For Windows Live
-DirectX 12 adoption a complete repeat of 10
-Inflated consoles much more than had they continued putting resources into PC gaming. You can thank every release that has a crappy FOV, unmappable controls, mouse smoothing acceleration, chunky HUD, inability to use a mouse for menus, etc. to them dumping more resources into that while ignoring the PC during that time.
-Paid companies to make Xbox exclusives, with multiple cases of the contract preventing them from releasing on Windows, even though the developers wanted to. So in other words, they paid to keep games OFF pc.
 
  • Like
Reactions: atom
like this
No one stated that average PC user would need to be a PC tech. You're flying off the deep end again. :rolleyes:

There is no way you can claim that the average gamer, the casual gamer, is a shallow idiot. No way at all. To make such a claim is simply ridiculous.

The casual gamer will weigh the odds and decide for themselves if an alternate OS to Windows is suited to their situation.

It's cute. The way people talk about Windows, it feels like nobody ever needs any kind of support for it at all. So intuitive, it teaches itself.
 
Windows very rarely needs the command line. The same cannot be said of Linux.

I can help someone go to the command line and type a few commands in the same way I can help the person navigate through RegEdit. The same person would not be able - or willing - to do neither on its own.
 
I can help someone go to the command line and type a few commands in the same way I can help the person navigate through RegEdit. The same person would not be able - or willing - to do neither on its own.

RegEdit isn't something anyone should use unless they know what they are doing. Even if you are an experienced Windows user, you need to know EXACTLY what any change to a RegEdit is doing otherwise the side effects can be very bad.
 
It's pretty rare you have to the registry editor also for general troubleshooting to be honest.

There is a great deal of customization for both Windows and 3rd party applications that can be achieved through the registry but something most would never touch day to day. There are a number of 3rd party GUI tools that can control those settings without directly touching the registry.
 
Just got done doing 15 lines of regedit to disable win 10 telemetry. : D

To get deep into ANY OS, you are going CMD/BASH whatever. I still trust Linux for more for Server (stability) as my mythtv box stays up for months - Although windows has come a long way. If there is ever the option for server apps.. Linux always over Windows (for me) - but that is not always a choice. For desktop use, Windows has always seemed more polished than Linux. But here - Linux has caught up quite a bit. My laptop is dedicated Fedora, which works very well on the limited hardware. Just web surf for the most part, but has the flexibility to add workstation level apps. Ran UT Gameservers under Linux back in the day. but my main desktop / game box remains WIn10. Tried SteamOS for a bit, it just wasn't ready for prime time - too many driver issues. The performance sacrifice and limited game selection was not worth it either.
 
So, on the one hand, it does not mean Windows is a fantastic OS. On the other hand, Android being popular means it is a fantastic OS? I find most folks are on Android because it is either that or buy an expensive iPhone. Learning Linux for a professional purpose or just to enjoy doing things is good. Trying to stick it to the man or playing Windows games in Linux means you still need Windows. Oh well, having fun is fine but a majority will still use Windows for gaming, among other things, even if it is Windows 7.

No one's 'sticking it to the man'. Windows 10 has issues, Microsoft's tactics as of late relating to Windows 10 are undesirable to many, therefore people want an alternative and they still want to game.

And you don't need Windows to play Windows games under Linux.
 
Windows very rarely needs the command line. The same cannot be said of Linux.

The use of terminal under Linux is only slightly more necessary than the need for terminal under macOS. Once you get past the very basics of macOS, you pretty much need terminal and the commands are literally identical. Under macOS you need to use terminal to write to NTFS formatted partitions, under Linux you simply and easily use the GUI file manager to access and manipulate NTFS partitions identically to Windows.

I use terminal under Linux to SSH into my server and to install software via apt, that's pretty much the extent of it. My desktop experience on a number of devices is flawless and I've been running the same install rock solid now for around three years on my main PC.
 
Technically you do even it's a reversed engineered subset version of it.

Technically speaking, that translation layer that's present under Windows also uses slightly different system calls between differing versions of Windows. So 'technically speaking' this is no different to running a title under a differing version of Windows.
 
Technically speaking, that translation layer that's present under Windows also uses slightly different system calls between differing versions of Windows. So 'technically speaking' this is no different to running a title under a differing version of Windows.
No, it really isnt.
 
Technically speaking, that translation layer that's present under Windows also uses slightly different system calls between differing versions of Windows. So 'technically speaking' this is no different to running a title under a differing version of Windows.

Why does Windows need a translation layer for the Win32 API? That's the native API of all versions of Windows though the supported APIs differ between versions.
 
Why does Windows need a translation layer for the Win32 API? That's the native API of all versions of Windows though the supported API is different between different versions.

Oh my God, we've been right over this in great detail.:rolleyes:
 
Oh my God, we've been right over this in great detail.:rolleyes:

Sure and it makes no sense that an OS would need a translation layer for its NATIVE APIs. The whole point of using native APIs is to avoid runtime overhead and things like translation layers.
 
Sure and it makes no sense that an OS would need a translation layer for its NATIVE APIs. The whole point of using native APIs is to avoid runtime overhead and things like translation layers.

Why? Because you don't understand how an OS works? What's the point of discussing things like this is you flat out refuse to accept the harsh realities of certain implementations because it goes against what you believe?

That Win32 API is mostly implemented in the translation layer 'within Windows', that translation layer has changed between differing versions of Windows as differing versions of Windows usually use differing versions of the NT kernel. Software does not communicate directly with the kernel and Win32 is mostly C.

This is ridiculous.
 
Why? Because you don't understand how an OS works? What's the point of discussing things like this is you flat out refuse to accept the harsh realities of certain implementations because it goes against what you believe?

That Win32 API is mostly implemented in the translation layer 'within Windows', that translation layer has changed between differing versions of Windows as differing versions of Windows usually use differing versions of the NT kernel. Software does not communicate directly with the kernel and Win32 is mostly C.

This is ridiculous.

You don't seem to know what native API means.
 
Back
Top