Alpha Centauri Forums
The Game
Linux port?
|
|
Alpha Centauri Forums
The Game
Linux port?
|
| Author | Topic: Linux port? |
| seagull |
posted 03-17-99 12:04 AM ET  
I heard Alpha Centauri was going to be ported to Linux? Anyone know if this is available? -- |
| Brother Greg |
posted 03-17-99 12:21 AM ET
Funny, I heard from EA that it definately wouldn't be. Or was that Mac? I forget... |
| Jythexinvok |
posted 03-21-99 12:35 AM ET
Call to Power is being ported to linux. To the best of my knowledge this is the only commercial game currently being worked on, and everyone else is just waiting to see how it fairs. One thing I"m actualy rather surpised at is noone has made a push for releasing Civ1 code. It's old so it's not comercialy viable, and it would make alot of fans, esp the ones who like to complain about features, happy since they can fiddle with it on thier own. It's realy a pitty there's no way Firaxis can put together a group of volunteers to work on all this little bells and whistels people keep asking for. Alot of them are small but still time consuming, and there are probably at least a few competant programmers among us. <wave> |
| Draxinusom |
posted 03-21-99 06:54 AM ET
Well if you want a Linux "port" now, go to www.vmware.com, download the Linux VM, install it, install Win95/98 or NT on it, install SMAC and have fun. That VM even supports DirectX under Linux (not Direct Sound though but that might change, it is yet a beta) Just my 2 Cents... CU Drax |
| Ashbri |
posted 03-21-99 10:00 AM ET
Linux? ROFL! |
| DaKrushr |
posted 03-21-99 10:52 AM ET
What's so funny about Linux, Ashbri? I take it you haven't tried it. Isn't it strange that a FREE OS is MORE stable, faster, and just plain BETTER than Windows? If you find a problem, you can actually get it fixed - and even talk directly to the developers! Try THAT with MS. You don't have to worry about bloatware - since most people writing open source don't care about sales, they can make it BETTER instead of just BIGGER. But hey, if you want to be locked into having no choice about your software, go right ahead - but don't be suprised when Linux has 30% market share. |
| Jythexinvok |
posted 03-21-99 08:48 PM ET
I have to admit I would like to see linux port. Linux isn't trivial, it sold nearly 3million copys last year, that's a significant user base. I know quite a few people who have linux on thier box and keep a copy of win95/NT on a seperate partion just so they can play games. |
| seagull |
posted 03-21-99 09:47 PM ET
That obviously doesn't include the many copies downloaded and borrowed ect, since this is a free OS. Wish I could see a port. However, this thread has made me curious as to whether or not CIV I is available. We shall see! |
| Ashbri |
posted 03-21-99 10:28 PM ET
Sorry, did not mean to offend anyone, and yes we have Linux at work so I have seen the benefits and stability of Linux. As well as the hacking it can require. But, I have to chuckle at the Linux chants. Linux may be all that they say (stable, supported, etc, etc) but then again, so was OS/2, MacOS, NextStep, and going back some, CP/M. I have seen this all before with those OS's. But they all suffered numerous hurdles. Chief amoung them, lack of software that people want and need. Go into Best Buy, COMP-USA, etc and look at the Linux section (if it exists) compared to the Windows section and you will see what I mean. I am a software developer so I have no problem switching to Linux if and when it ever becomes a viable commercial success. But in many ways, Linux is a step back more than a step forward. |
| seagull |
posted 03-21-99 10:33 PM ET
Much better put. At least this time you don't sound like an immature troll. I find that Linux makes a great alternative to Windows, and it doesn't bother me that applications aren't always available on it. I;ve come to accept that the computer industry seems to (for some reason) prefer Windows. Check out http://www.kmfms.com |
| jig |
posted 03-22-99 02:12 AM ET
As I understand it one of the lead programmers (Chirs Pine?) at Firaxis are keen on doing a linux port. If we bug Firaxis enough I think we might see a linux port before the end of the year!  |
| Phreak |
posted 03-22-99 12:44 PM ET
If you have linux and have not installed KDE, you don't know what your missing. Try it out, that desktop enviornment BLOWS windows away. I used linux as a toy before I installed KDE, now I have StarOffice and KDE going (both freeware) and I am using them to do most of my daily tasks. Of course I still need windows for games...but that may change soon... Phreak |
| damien |
posted 03-22-99 05:31 PM ET
There's a freeware Civ clone for Linux called FreeCiv (www.freeciv.org I think). The graphics are a bit dodgy at the moment but it's pretty cool. BTW if anyone gets KDE make sure you get 1.1 cos 1.0's sloooow |
| Jythexinvok |
posted 03-24-99 10:22 PM ET
Unfortunatly due to thie use of WinG, neither Civ1 or Civ2 can run under Linux/Wine. For those who don't know about Wine, it's a program that allows you to run windows software on a linux box. But it's WinG & DirrectX support is incomplete. I agree that linux hurts due to the lack of software available for it. But this doesn't hurt it as much as people think. Most of the market for linux involves situations where software exists and it's a dedicated machine (ISP type stuff) or you write your own software. That's how we use linux at my work, we write our own software for internal use. We also have a win95 machine incase someone needs to use Word or play Civ2. |
| MikeH II |
posted 03-25-99 04:25 AM ET
I've only got Win '95 because there are few games available for other OS's, I'd love to play around with something else. |
| outermost nervepath |
posted 03-25-99 10:05 PM ET
Comments like "people seem to perfer Windows for some reason" never cease to amaze me. Could it be the fifty million copies in place? The hundred thousand software titles available? The cheap, widely available hardware? The thousands and thousands of related books available? Hmm. And while we're at it, let's think about development issues. Linux doesn't have a Distributed Transaction Coordinator, which pretty much kicks it right out the window (no pun intended) for serious large scale database usage. NT, on the other hand, ships with a pretty killer fully XA-compliant DTC. Similar examples abound. All of these highly touted spare-time Linux developers want to work on cool, high-visibility stuff like the Gnome GUI. A DTC is seriously complex to write, even harder to test (not to mention requiring a small investment in things like a wide array of major database software for testing -- tens of thousands of dollars right there), and worst of all - for Linux - they're incredibly BORING to write. This is true of many critical-yet-missing features. Linux, being freeware, is essentially it's own worst enemy. I have used tons of different platforms. My old $28,000 SGI box from a couple years ago comes to mind. This supposedly superior system (IRIX 5 is very similar to Linux) was very slow, unnecessarily complex and arcane, and like Linux, suffered from a dearth of useful software. Typically you were facing FEWER choices. If you were lucky, there was ONE, maybe two professional-level packages available in any given category. In a nutshell, don't believe everything you read. You only live once, and nobody is handing out bonus points for rooting for underdogs. And they sure as hell aren't offering decent salaries. My Windows box GUI looks pretty cool, everything runs pretty fast, it is VERY stable (I haven't powered this one down in about six months, and then it was to install some hardware, which took less than fifteen minutes), was only a few thousand bucks, and has vast truckloads of software available. Including cool games like SMAC. (My stay-on-topic tie-in.) Seeing anybody port something like SMAC to Linux always sets off red flags because it tells me people at the top of those companies aren't good businessmen. The market just doesn't exist. Hell, the OS is free, which leads to the conclusion (in any realistic assesment) that you're more likely to get pirated than paid in the Linux market. Generally speaking, geeks can't run companies well, otherwise I'd be comparing Linux to the Mac OS (the only truly successful UNIX implementation). |
| Jythexinvok |
posted 03-29-99 03:09 AM ET
NT databases? <sigh> I'll never get used to putting databases of any real size or value on anything less then a micro. Linux is a nitch OS. Unix/VMS in general has it's place and isn't going anywhere because it's good at it. It's been interesting seeing linux work it's way into the more mainstream market, and I've seen it improve drasiticly in the proccess, so I'm rooting for it. There are things 95/NT simply isn't appropriate for. People like 95/NT for a very simple reasons: it's easy to use and it's common. Unfortunaly this can cause problems, since people tend to overextend windows, expecting it to be good at everything. 50 million vs 3 million is a big difference, but if this where anywhere other then the OS market people would laugh. So what if people buy more Fords then Pipers. They arn't the same thing and shouldn't be treated as such. |
| outermost nervepath |
posted 04-01-99 06:44 PM ET
The existence of a DTC does not necessarily imply that the database is on NT. The DTC could be doing things like enrolling MTS middleware components into MVS DB/2 XA transactions. And as long as we're mentioning MVS, are you aware that the original creator of MVS also wrote the NT kernel? Have you heard of OpenNT? (They renamed it a few months ago, though.) Unix Review named Open NT -- a BSD implementation running on the NT kernel -- the fastest Unix implementation available when comparing like/like hardware (a relatively powerful Compaq vs. a midrange R6000, etc.) Keep in mind I'm referring to the kernel here -- below Win32, the base GUI, and the IE GUI. I have some MAJOR issues with Win32 and it's evil Win16 roots, and other areas. Bearing THAT in mind, I must also take exception to your implication that 95 and NT can be lumped together. A typically simplistic off-the-cuff mistake for most non-Windows guys. I'll never claim that NT does everything great, but it does most stuff better than Linux is ever likely to... not necessarily due to raw capabilities, but due to a simple nod to the REAL WORLD, where I live, and from whence I draw my paycheck. This forum has over 4,000 messages dedicated to ideas about how to make SMAC better. I'd rather see them improve it than waste their time chasing a virtually irrelevant user community. |
| JasHawk |
posted 04-01-99 10:04 PM ET
MVS? do you mean VMS or MVS? MVS is a layer of the Opertaing system on IBM mainframes, VMS is an oprtating system made by Digital (now Compaq) that ran on minis (VAXen and the like).
And the guy who said linux is no good because it doesnt have apps must rate in as apathetic if he doesnt like windows, because he would then write apps for linux no? *shrug* |
| Jythexinvok |
posted 04-02-99 01:04 AM ET
I will admit, and appologise, that I unfairly lump 95/NT. I never deal dirrectly with the kernel of either OS. The software I've written in the past doesn't need to so I never have. However, you have to keep in mind that the 'REAL WORLD' is a big place. Most of the time when I hear someone say this, I find that they have fallen into a sterotype of what they believe the demographics to be, and can ignore very substantial markets. Then someone takes a risk, and 20 years later the market is open and everyone likes to say how obvious it was. Also keep in mind, linux may be free, but very few people get it that way. Most people, companys included, buy thier distributions from RedHat or other such companys that 'fix up' and repackage linux. I bought my copy, the peopl I work for bought copies for our machines, ect. I know quite a few companys that produce commercial linux software and are doing quite well. I also get a paycheck, and mine comes from unix programming. I am not alone, nor am I statisticly insignificant. I use unix for work, win95 for play, and NT for circuit design. Like programming languages, they all have thier place, no matter how humble, and I would never want to see any of them as the only option. |
| Glak |
posted 04-02-99 12:09 PM ET
I think the big problem with linux is the attitude of the people involved in it. My brother for example. In his spare time he works on linux (like sending in stuff to redhat to help make it better) and on making other programs. Now I'm sure that is very useful but it isn't everything. While some people should focus on making the operating system better others (and I mean most) should actually focus on making products. Linux people focus too much on the operating system itself and how great and wonderful it is. However their doesn't seem to be a big priority on actually doing anything the results in a final product. I think that games drive an operating system's success, especially in the long term. Ok let's say you are like 15 and you start programming, what kind of programming do you want to do? Most likely you want to design games for the computer that you are currently using. Ok now what OS do you have? Probably windows, simply because you bought it to play games. Very few people say something like: "I'm going to run out and get me a linux computer so I can play games!" You also have to consider that video game companies are not groups of programmers but instead are real companies where few people are programmers and they use programs that aren't linux (3d studio max for instance). Linux might be reaching the critical mass where it can become a popular operating system with real market power but it isn't there yet. Once Blizzard starts making linux games that will be the turning point, until then there is no reason to get linux unless you are a programmer (and most people aren't programmers btw, linux people tend to forget that). So here is what I recommend the linux missionaries (linux is a religion isn't it?) do: make a video game! I mean a good video game where you have non programmers do the non programming parts. You need at least one good game in each category every two years, that is what people expect. |
| Thue |
posted 04-02-99 12:47 PM ET
In the chat with BR yesterday, BR said that Firaxis originally had intended to do the Linux port themselves. However, thinks had come up and the Linux port had been left in the swamp. Firaxis had now given the responsibility for an eventual Linux port over to Electronic Arts. I was, however, not completely decided whether to to the Linux port or not  , but a mac port should be certain. |
| Thue |
posted 04-02-99 12:49 PM ET
Sorry, a typo. I was, however, not completely decided whether... should of course be It was, however, ... |
| Jythexinvok |
posted 04-04-99 01:37 AM ET
Ah games, the true make or break. Well, not quite. The game market will deside whether linux completes with general purpose OSes like Windows and MacOS. Liunx however also has homes outside the end-user market. I've seen some very interesting work in using stripped down linux kernels in embeded systems, potentialy saving millions or billions since companys have a viable alternative to specialized processors and other costly aproaches. The Beowulf project is also an intersting area, replacing expensive mid-range supercomputers with extreamly cost-effective clustercomputers running linux. Not a huge market since not many people need the power of a supercomputer, but it has it's place. Though I have to admit I realy like the idea of game companys making linux/Beowulf ports and setting up mass game servers <grin> |
| outermost nervepath |
posted 04-04-99 11:18 AM ET
You're right: VMS, not MVS. Still a pretty big deal. I was wondering how long it would be before someone brought up the "free" thing, but Jythexinvok beat me to the punch. Even though Linux may be available for free, that's one of the least important features. Real companies really don't care about that. Hell, I just submitted a purchase request for a $150,000 report server software package. Sometime next month, somebody will buy me about $80,000 worth of hardware to run it on. Who cares about free? As far as JasHawk's comment about Linux adhereing to standards, those standards are just fine if you already know them, but the learning curve is very steep (speaking in the vernacular... in reality, a flat learning curve would be a more accurate description of increased difficulty). Er... The point is, Windows may have invented certain standards, but these days they really are standards. Literally millions of people write code to those standards each day, and tens of millions apply their knowledge of those standards. Just because Linux sticks to UNIX standards invented by a bunch of college people twenty or thirty years ago doesn't lend it any particular value -- and in fact it's origins actually detract from it's value: I can only imagine my mom and dad trying to figure out how to use their brand new UNIX machine. I'd have to get a separate phone line just to answer their questions. No, the Linux market is not a good target market for a company who seeks to maximize their profitability (which naturally implies minimizing their expenditures). There is just no way around that simple fact. It's part of the reason you only see the mega-vast companies like IBM and HP saying they'll support Linux. They already have significant in-house UNIX capabilities, and the costs are minor relative to the company's overall income. The benefit is the free advertising they get, not the increased customer base, and certainly not the sales. Mainly because of the press, they are portrayed as some kind of "hero", and they get to deal a relatively cheap blow at their arch-rival Microsoft. This stuff is so crystal clear, and people just pretend they're doing it out of the goodness of their heart, or because they "believe in" the value of Linux. I say "pretend" because I simply can't believe that many people are that naive. Everything is marketing. |
| Plasmoid |
posted 04-04-99 01:27 PM ET
For those of you how think Linux has no games, here a list of available/developing commercial games: Quake Have I missed any? WordPerfect 8 you see Linux has "commercial" grade applications. For those who buy one $9x10^99 computer any OS won't change a ****. However some people buy 300+ smaller computers and then the cost of the OS REALLY represents a large part of the budget Plasmoid |
| Evk |
posted 04-04-99 02:46 PM ET
Okay, that's .... five games. Total. Five games total for Linux? How many Windows games come out a month? Thirty? Well, let's be safe and say 20. So - four times as many windows games come out a MONTH than Linux has avaiable TOTAL. Assuming those numbers are right. Then again, you can make the argument that the majority of these games are mediocre and you'd be right, but you still end up missin the classics. Such as SMAC. |
| Plasmoid |
posted 04-04-99 06:30 PM ET
Evk, how are Quake 1,2,3 mediocore? Hopkins FBI is definetly a good game. What's so bad with Civ:CTP? Compare that to most of the games for Windows. Sure you get classics like SMAC, but you get a full load of bad games as well. I have yet to see a bad game being ported to Linux. Also WINE, although not complete, can run such games as Starcraft, Unreal, Fallout 1/2 and many others. You'd be surprised how far Linux has come in 6 months. PS. One more game "Fire and Darkness" for Linux |
| JasHawk |
posted 04-04-99 08:36 PM ET
As for more game that have ports to Linux, there is Ultima Online The second Age. And when i mentioned free before i meant (and even said!!) free speech not free beer. the importance point i wanted to make is that people are free if they want to contribute to Linux and become part of the "in" community if they want. The also arent locked into one vendor (and any stupid decisions they make). cost was not an issue for me, i have both paid for linux and d/l'ed it off the net for free (i like having the stuff on a CD media its handy, and i'll pay for that). the best thing about linux is you dont have to live with someone elses stupidity. linux (and/or some other OSS operating system) will eventually take a large (read > 50%) share of the market because it a) wont go away, and b) will steadily get better. it isnt tied to anyone singular company (unlike other OSes). and the people who develop code for it usually wouldnt want to use anything else, so they will keep on developing for it. linux has reached the point of positive feedback, its feeding its own momentum, and it wont slow in grow until some other exponentially based deterent comes along (and i dont see that happening soon, although this may change in the future). linux is here to stay, its just a matter of how big it gets (and at current growth rate of almost twice that of other OSes it is getting big xref IDC's latest report on OSes). linux' biggest weakness right now is its client (read desktop) setup. but this is rapidly changing with things like GNOME & KDE. can anyone say double/triple buffered anti-aliased 256 min level alpha blendable canvas widgets? and thats just the 2d stuff. when Xfree86 4.0 gets it ass out the door, GNOME will have some awesome 3d widgets too. linux is a growing market (it hasnt reached its full growth yet). whats more is it used mostly by tech heads, and alot of the guys buy/play games. the market isnt as mature as window yet for games, but it will be there soon (2-5 years), and for anyone who doesnt have plans for developing for it in the pipeline will cop a hit. im not saying they should be releasing titles today for it, but it should defenitely be on the books for future development (ie hiring staff, coporate knowledge levels of the platform should be built up, ie marketing, pricing, development standards etc etc). linux is here to stay. it will grow bigger. my suggestion is, if you are a coder have a looksee at it atleast. if you are a "power" user have a look at it as well. if you are a normal user wait a few years. if you are a developer you should already have started to ramp up your plans for possible distribution. oh and if you dont like, dont use it. p.s. rememer FREE SPEECH, not FREE BEER there is a huge difference. learn what Free Software and Open Source Software actually means (instead of just assuming it). check out things like the GPL (GNU General Public License), debians open software guide (www.debian.org) and other such things. Read stuff written by RMS (Richard Stallman) and ESR (eric raymond). you dont have to agree with whats said (or believed) but it makes you look a bit stupid if you are arguing about it when you are clueless about it. i personally would like to see a few more non sequitur arguments. |
| seagull |
posted 04-04-99 08:37 PM ET
I had no idea one simple question could start such a war. Yes Linux is good, but of course I need to have Windows on another partition. Programs like WINE and VMWare come in handy, however. However, it would be nice if SMAC was redily available for linux simply becauseI was under the impression that it appealed to that kind of a crowd. (You probably won -gull. |
| outermost nervepath |
posted 04-05-99 04:58 PM ET
I've gotta back out of this one due to waning interest. Yes, JasHawk, I'm well aware of what GNU is and means and so on, I'm simply unimpressed. I've owned perhaps ten or twelve computers in the last twenty years, I can program in something like 26 languages (if you're willing to count all the dead ones), I've used god only knows how many operating systems and platforms, and at the end of the day I still come home to my trusty Win98/WinNT network and fire up SMAC and thank the powers that be that SOMEBODY finally gave us ONE standard to deal with, because about ten years into this computer thing I was really getting tired of throwing everything away and starting over every 24 months. Whew. Nothing like a run-on sentence as your parting shot, is there? Have fun, whatever you may think... |
| Xotor |
posted 04-05-99 05:18 PM ET
Linux is going to take over the INDUSTRY. Microsoft has bloated its code SO much that even the original PROGRAMMERS don't know what they've done. Win2000 is delayed and is not going to be much of an upgrade either. Their chief programmer has left (or was it retired) and they even had to coax a retired programmer back to oraganize their programming. Microsoft has already added every feature a person could want, soon they won't even be able to offer anything else besides bug fixes. MICROSOFT will bury itself. Linux on the other hand is FREE. It is CONSTANTLY being developed and optimized. It is FAST! a good 486 will run most things nicely. Windows WASTES processor power. Linux is GREAT with memory, it is very secure, it was built from the ground up with MULTITASKING in mind (Win95/98 is just DOS 7.0 with a nice GUI). It can function as a FULL netserver. MANY programmers are switching or porting to it, seeing the inevitable (Netscape, Corel, id, etc.). It has CONSTANT support. There are VERY few bugs. The problem is lack of quickly, easy installation. People are still to caught up on the Win95 weenie-ism. People can't do **** without a GUI to guide them through. Those who doubt the inevitable, Linux is here to stay and DOMINATE. Microsoft WILL fall to Linux. This IS the fortold future. -Xotor- |
| Evk |
posted 04-05-99 05:42 PM ET
Plasmoid, I think you misunderstood me. I meant the majority of WINDOWS titles are mediocre. |
| geraden |
posted 04-05-99 08:53 PM ET
I love this topic. I love the zeal that accompanies a debate about 1s and 0s. This sort of thing gets hotter than religious debates. With about the same amount of clarity by the debaters. Here are a couple of failings that linux has that have not been addressed in this forum. One is that linux, currently, is not easy to install. Note that I did not say it was hard. Though for a lot of people, even with a competent distribution, it would be so. Nevertheless, this isn't important. What is important is that it is not as easy to install as Windows is. This automatically places it outside the reach of a majority of users. This automatically means that Windows has a larger share. This has nothing, NOTHING to do with the quality of the OSes involved. The other issue is that, currently, there are very few accessible, useful, commercial products out there for Linux relative to Windows. Not just software, though there isn't much there either. I mean things like, oh, say, the plug-in version of Barney. Consumers like to be able to buy a product and instantly use it. They don't like having to go through a bunch of archaic steps in order to install it. Windows isn't great in this regard, but it is eons better than Linux, both in the amount and the ease of use of the products available. Unfortunately, having a large market share makes it more and more likely that one will keep the market share - why develop for something that may give you money, when you have a guaranteed 95% market with no extra effort? Honestly, I think Microsoft is losing a lot of their steam, and if Linux is going to take them over, they will do it soon. However, until it becomes far easier to use and install, and there exists a product line comparable to Windows for consumers, Windows will rule. As sad as it sounds, the measure of a platform is not the quality of it, but what it can run. Gardener Geraden |
| Plasmoid |
posted 04-05-99 10:25 PM ET
Except for the partitioning, Linux is fairly easy to install. Auto-detection works great Finds my Video, Printer, sound card.Linux is easy to use, but hard to learn. Windows is hard to use, but easy to learn. Actually most of the Linux apps aren't commercial but still are very good(x11amp, Crystal Space...) |
| geraden |
posted 04-05-99 11:46 PM ET
Plasmoid, I agree with you - I think that Linux, especially with recent distributions, is fairly easy to install. It is nowhere near the ease of Win98, which has you make all of 2 or 3 choices THE ENTIRE installation. I also agree that what products are out there for Linux tend to be good. They sometimes tend to be great. They are also usually geared towards the server market. Most applications are not remotely as user-friendly IN APPEARANCE as Windows things are. Not to mention the installation procedures. There is no "install wizard", and you effectively have eliminated 99% of your potential consumers when you say "unpack the .tar files..." I think Linux has it's place, and I do hope that developers start taking it more seriously. I think that it is extensible enough so that in the future it can be as easy, or as complex, as desired. I just don't think that today is that day. And in the meantime, it's just not as useful for everyone as Windows is. For now, both Linux and Windows have their uses. Like playing SMAC, for instance. Gardener Geraden |
| Plasmoid |
posted 04-06-99 12:26 AM ET
As of RedHat5.2 you can select server or workstation and have an automatic installation. Read freashmeat or visit Linuxberg and you'll notice plenty of graphical front-ends. Some Commercial apps have a gui-install and a windows like appearance. Just remember, in Linux if you want something you'll probably get it. In Windows, if someone see money in something you'll get it , at a price. |
| Silver |
posted 04-08-99 12:40 PM ET
First of all, I would like to return to the original point. Please, please, PLEASE port your stuff to Linux. I would happily buy just about any commercial-grade game for it at this point. As for the holy war, I think some people are not looking at this in the right way. The reason Linux has no games is because the market is just emerging and hasn't proven itself yet. The only way this will happen is if daring companies make the jump and the Linux users support them. IMHO, this is only a matter of time. Windows may be easier to install, but I think this is due to two main factors. First, inertia. Any company that comes out with hardware would be stupid if they didn't release drivers, etc for Windows. Also Microsoft has had much more time to deal with these issues than the Linux crowd. The speed at which Linux is improving, however, is phenomenal. Second, very few end users have to install Windows at all! Almost every PC comes with it preinstalled. I'd like to see what happened if every time someone bought a Windows machine, they had to first fdisk and format their drive etc.. Microsoft only has the dominance at this point because they have the dominance. This WILL change. World domination! Long live Tux!! |
| Jythexinvok |
posted 04-12-99 03:15 AM ET
Ah the linux learning curve. I've been programming in it for years and I still pick up a new trick or two every couple days. Then again there are about a billion other 'little tricks' left, so it's not that much of an occomplisment. Then again windows has an intersting learnign curve, very quick at first, but then slows down when you want to do more complicated stuff, i.e. anything not covered in windows abridged exuse for a built in help system (thank the goddess for man pages) I doubt linux will ever take the lion's share of the market, but it can probably take enough for people to make a profit. The question that Firaxis, and other manufactures have to ask themselves, how much will it cost to port? If the cost of conversion is great in relation to the expanded market, then it's not worth it. If the cost is low, and it can be done quickly, then it's worth it. It's not a question of 'will people buy it', but a question of 'will enough people buy it to offset what it cost us'. Unfortunaly these are hard numbers to guess at. That's why large companies have taken a shot at development, because they can absorb the loss if thier estimates turn out wrong, and small startups (like Loki, who are doing CTP) try it as a make-or-break. <wave> |
| outermost nervepath |
posted 04-14-99 05:50 PM ET
I lied. I'm back. And, weirdly, I'm here to point out something which is IN FAVOR of the Linux camp (which isn't to say I've converted, but this definitely caught my attention). You guys might want to check out "wine" at www.winehq.com. It's a Windows emulator (they say it technically isn't, but for all practical purposes, it is). This thing is doing some amazing stuff these days. (It isn't Linux-specific.) For example, they rate win apps (the EXE binaries, mind you) from 0-5, 0 is worst. Stuff like Half-Life got a "4" ... the guy played it for two hours. MS Word got a "4" and a "5"... Didn't see a SMAC review. Any of you Linux types out there care to check it out and post the results? (This is the "Just How Hardcore Are You" challenge... apparently wine is a bitch to install.) |
| Wraith |
posted 04-15-99 10:36 PM ET
--"What is important is that it is not as easy to install as Windows is." You've installed windows maybe what? Once? Twice? I happen to have to had to do this sort of thing for a living, and I can state with certainty that Windows is not easy to install. I don't know how many times it's installed something twice, told me it conflicted with itself, and then wouldn't remove just one copy of the drivers... Or trying to get basic networking functions on a Win95 box? With Linux (Unix, BSD, whatever) you can actually tell the OS what to do. That horrid GUI in Windows just keeps you at one remove, and you can't do diddly to get the bloody thing working right if it doesn't want to. Windows is good at giving the appearance of an easy install, but it certainly isn't the fact of an easy install. --"there are very few accessible, useful, commercial products out there for Linux relative to Windows." I've always prefered quality to quantity myself. And, frankly, just about any Unix app can be ported to Linux quite easily, and often is. There are also things like Netscape, office suites, and so on. --"They don't like having to go through a bunch of archaic steps in order to install it." Try Red Hat's Disk Druid sometime. Also, you seem to be forgetting every incarnation of Windows prior to 95. You cannot tell me that there was a viable OS in Windows 1.0 (or 2.0, or even 3.0). Take a look at the comparative ease of uses, there. Early DOS vs. early Linux, compared with the same thing a few years later. Linux is more robust, more stable, more network oriented, and is just starting to hit its stride. At kernel revision 2.2 with KDE, it's far, far from DOS 5 or 6.22 with Windows 3.1 --"The reason Linux has no games is because the market is just emerging and hasn't proven itself yet." There was a poll over on Slashdot about this, and there's a lot of Linux users out there waiting to buy games. And it's not true there's no games for it, since there's quite a few projects like freeCiv and Heretic ports, not to mention Quake 2 and several upcoming games. This platform is perfect for on-line, multi-player games (where the entire FPS industry is rapidly headed), since it was actually designed with networking in mind (which Windows most emphatically wasn't, as evinced by NT Server). This is a market that will be quickly exploited as soon as one company shows the market's there. --"I'd like to see what happened if every time someone bought a Windows machine, they had to first fdisk and format their drive etc.." This is the telling point in Microsoft's dominance of the market. Their OEM agreements. Now that it's actually possible to order a prebuilt computer with Linux installed, things have a chance of changing. Wraith |
| achatham |
posted 04-16-99 12:48 AM ET
First, about wine: It is a very amazing piece of work, but it's got a long way to go. Why it's technically not an emulator is because what it does is, every time a program makes a call to a library that Windows provides, wine provides that function instead. So it's not really emulation. As for SMAC, I have tried. I have failed. Unfortunately, it fails hard, requiring me to either telnet into my machine to save it or reboot it. I don't even get to the intro. The wine people have, however, been working on something in addition to the "emulator" part. That's winelib, which allows people to recompile their Windows applications for Linux and have them work natively in Linux. This would be of great use to Firaxis. Then again, it might not be. As for games. I will buy CTP for Linux when it comes out (any day now). Not necessarily because I like the game or have heard rave things about it, but because it's there. I'll buy it becaus they'll make it, even if it's no good. Hey, it'll be the best thing out there for Linux. (I don't like Quake). I already own SMAC for Windows, but I haven't played it since January because I don't have the time to take 5 minutes to reboot, deal with an OS I hardly ever use and haven't tuned, then reboot again all just for a game. I may play more during the summer when I can just stay in Windows, but the advantages of having a Linux box up 24-7 at college are too great to pass up. Multiple, personal email accounts that _I_ manage, my own webserver, a fake BO server I would buy SMAC again for Linux in a heartbeat, though. |
| outermost nervepath |
posted 04-16-99 05:18 PM ET
WINE and SMAC (sounds like the sequel to Trainspotting): Oh well. Can't hurt to ask, right? You ought to post your results... who knows, maybe one of those WINEo's will investigate it and fix it... probably not, but...Wraith: I'm just throwing this out for comment... If Linux was as popular as Windows (eg. there were 50,000,000 copies in daily use, over 100,000 reasonably current software titles available, and tens of thousands of pieces of hardware available), do you really believe Linux would be rock-solid with every driver in the market? I know quite a bit about Unix, having programmed under it for a number of years on Sun's and SGI's, and I know vast ****loads about Windows, having used it ever since the unquestionably hideous version 2... Most of what people blame on Windows is actually the fault of crappy drivers, or crappy software. Most complainers don't believe me when I say that my NT and 95 installations... and quite a few years ago, 3.1... are super stable. I have a P75 file server running NT 4.0 which hasn't been rebooted in two years (and when I did, it was to install additional SCSI drives). My Win98 box has been up non-stop since about January, when I rebooted for some game installation. Bear in mind that I spend most of my time writing code in VC, VB, and sometimes I even stoop to Java (when speed isn't important). The secret is buying good hardware, and knowing what you're doing. Most people I know install everything the cat drags in, then whine and bitch when everything blows up. You can't forget that the Windows world, due mainly to it's popularity, is plauged by completely ****ty programmers. Not that I'm going to change anybody's mind, but I guess it had to be said. Oh well. Too bad about WINE though. |
| Jythexinvok |
posted 04-17-99 12:52 AM ET
Windows is definaly NOT easy to install unless you're working with a prepackeged highly standardized off-the-shelf computer with no real diviations. I just spend 8 hours trying to get my win95 machine back up and stable, and I am not a novice to this. Win95 can be very petty and patronizing about listening to it's user. NT is alot better about this, but still has some of the same shortcommings. Now compare this to the 45 mintues it takes to slag and rebuild one of our linux boxes at work. One can install linux without having to fdisk thier drive, but who would want to? the file system windows (I dont' know about NTFS, so this rant doesn't apply to that) is a horrid legacy system. Long file names are an unstable kludge, no symbolic links (shortcuts are a poor attempt at duplicating this), poor dirrectory-partion linking, ect ect. As for wine.. it will probably never work with any of the civ games. DirrectX is difficult to port, microsoft has a bad habbit of changing it's api's every once in a while to prevent people from dupicating it, and to make sure software manufactures keep in line.. don't play nice, they don't release the new interfaces..... Though at this poitn we've deviated significantly from SMAC |
| maxpublic |
posted 04-17-99 03:20 AM ET
Just my two cents: I've been programming on and off for more than twenty years now, which includes a great deal of experience with Unix, Linux, and every damned version of DOS, Windows, and NT dreck you care to name. So when we compare our relative experiences with the various OS's, my familiarity is beyond that of the average consumer, and perhaps even that of the average programmer. Given the choice, I'll take Linux over '98 or NT any day of the week, for reasons people have already stated in abundance and which I won't bore the reader by repeating. Unlike nervepath, I don't think quality has anything to do with popularity contests expressed in dollars. Microsoft didn't achieve a monopoly position because it's software was better than Unix or Linux; it did so because it was adept at peddling a substandard OS to a clueless public (which includes the business community, as I can very well attest to). I can give you dozens of examples in my own experience where companies bought NT or Windows over obtaining Unix or Linux in the face of objections from their own IS department simply because idiot managers could see commercials for Windows but not for Unix or Linux. How could a product be any good if somebody didn't own it, protect it jealousy, and spend a great deal of money advertising it? But all this is really beside the point. Fact is, Linux is becoming much more user-friendly than it was just a couple of years ago, and it's popularity is growing at a rather remarkable rate. No amount of Microsoft-stroking or Windows-worshipping will change that, thank the gods. And even those who view Bill Gates as the Second Coming should see this as a good thing - as anyone who's taken Business 101 should know, competition can only help to improve Windows. So detractors who harbor an irrational dislike of Linux should take heart at it's growing market share, because - if they believe in red-blooded American individualistic capitalism - it'll compel Microsoft to put out even better products. Now me, the moment games start porting to Linux on a regular basis is the day I convert my second machine to a Linux box as well. And the day I dump Windows altogether is a day I'll rejoice with much beer-drinking. (grin) Max |
| Wraith |
posted 04-17-99 11:40 AM ET
--"WINE and SMAC (sounds like the sequel to Trainspotting)" --"do you really believe Linux would be rock-solid with every driver in the market?" Depends on the drivers, really. If the corps start doing their own drivers, rather than releasing interface info to the Linux society, this would certainly become a problem at some point. But the difference here is that Linux people will tell you when the driver is an unstable beta rather than letting you find out when it bombs out. --"Most of what people blame on Windows is actually the fault of crappy drivers, or crappy software." Many of those crappy drivers and software being included with the OS, of course. Here's another point in Linuxs favor, since you can tell it not to install the bits you don't want much easier than you can with Windows (in the rare cases you can do it at all). --"I have a P75 file server running NT 4.0 which hasn't been rebooted in two years" I don't say this sort of thing can't happen, but it's not nearly as common as it is with Linux or Novell. --"You can't forget that the Windows world, due mainly to it's popularity, is plauged by completely ****ty programmers." You're right, and quite a few of them work for Microsoft. Even giving more blame to app programers isn't a saving grace for Windows whatever, since it can't handle badly-behaved apps. Unix and so were actually designed to be multi-tasking machines, and that makes it rarer for a poorly written program to be able to take down the whole OS. NT is certainly better about this than 9x, but it's certainly not good at it. --"simply because idiot managers could see commercials for Windows but not for Unix or Linux." Just a note: recently seen on I-35 (Austin, Tx) was a billboard proclaiming "NT runs UNIX! Sorry Sun!" Wraith |
| SMACTrek |
posted 07-20-99 01:08 AM ET
The Holy Wars Continue... |
| SMACTrek |
posted 07-20-99 01:21 AM ET
I feel like such a traitor, dual-booting Win98 with Linux. Oh well. There's so much ground to cover, though that I'll probably need Windows to function as my "training wheels" for the time being. But Windows will go down someday, sometime. |
To close this thread, click here (moderator or admin only).  |
Powered by: Ultimate Bulletin Board, Version 5.18
© Madrona Park, Inc., 1998.