open All Channels
seplocked EVE General Discussion
blankseplocked The Linux Client is disappointing
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7

Author Topic

Sythyss
Posted - 2009.02.02 21:01:00 - [31]
 

Originally by: Par'Gellen
I thought all Linux users were leet enough to write their own upgrades... Rolling Eyes


....huh? get a grip on reality

Par'Gellen
Gallente
Neon Cranium
Posted - 2009.02.02 21:01:00 - [32]
 

Originally by: Sythyss
Originally by: Par'Gellen
I thought all Linux users were leet enough to write their own upgrades... Rolling Eyes


....huh? get a grip on reality
Didn't catch the sarcasm eh? Razz

Corwain
Posted - 2009.02.02 21:06:00 - [33]
 

Originally by: WarlockX
Originally by: Sythyss

the main purpose of an OS is the ability to support software, and make that process as automated or customized as the user wants, and in that respect linux does a much better job.


No its not.

If there was no OS then every software company would have to build pretty much their own operating software to interface with the hardware.

The purpose of the OS is to run the software and interface with the hardware so that the software doesn't need to worry about that.

For this stated purpose then ONE standard is good and competition is bad. I want to buy software take it home and know that it works. Period. Just like when I buy an appliance i want to know that I can take it home and plug it in and not worry about which type of electricity plugs my house has, that's the point of a standard.

Let's look at the two extremes and see which would be bad and which one be good.

Extreme number one there's only 1 OS on the market: Then all software would work for it. Is this bad? Meh, maybe as the OS company can be lazy and not update and there will probably be lots of easily targeted virus.

Extreme number two, there are literally hundreds of main steam OS's: Then all software takes decades to write to work for all OS's and is filled with bugs because it need to be compatible with everything. Hence the quality of all software is worse as too much time is spent witting compatibility code rather then features.


I know which one Id rather live in. Good software, short development and greater stabability for one OS >>>> OS competition.



Because Windows is so good at interfacing Linux and Mac programs with the hardware amirite?

Armoured C
Gallente
Noir.
Noir. Mercenary Group
Posted - 2009.02.02 21:06:00 - [34]
 

Edited by: Armoured C on 02/02/2009 21:06:38
Originally by: Sythyss
Originally by: Nessaden
Originally by: Corwain

And Linux is mainstream nowadays.
Inaccurate.


it's in no way as mainstream as windows, but it's mainstream enough to get companies like CCP to start developing support for it =P. As I said something like this would be unheard of a few years ago.


windows IS mainstream the only closest thing to it mainstream wise is apple

linux is in no way mainstream in the slightest... but you know what ever help you sleep at night

Sythyss
Posted - 2009.02.02 21:07:00 - [35]
 

Originally by: WarlockX
Originally by: Sythyss

the main purpose of an OS is the ability to support software, and make that process as automated or customized as the user wants, and in that respect linux does a much better job.


No its not.

If there was no OS then every software company would have to build pretty much their own operating software to interface with the hardware.

The purpose of the OS is to run the software and interface with the hardware so that the software doesn't need to worry about that.

For this stated purpose then ONE standard is good and competition is bad. I want to buy software take it home and know that it works. Period. Just like when I buy an appliance i want to know that I can take it home and plug it in and not worry about which type of electricity plugs my house has, that's the point of a standard.

Let's look at the two extremes and see which would be bad and which one be good.

Extreme number one there's only 1 OS on the market: Then all software would work for it. Is this bad? Meh, maybe as the OS company can be lazy and not update and there will probably be lots of easily targeted virus.

Extreme number two, there are literally hundreds of main steam OS's: Then all software takes decades to write to work for all OS's and is filled with bugs because it need to be compatible with everything. Hence the quality of all software is worse as too much time is spent witting compatibility code rather then features.


I know which one Id rather live in. Good software, short development and greater stabability for one OS >>>> OS competition.



Alrighty, for your extreme number one, in my opinion that's pretty bad. Whoever that one company is can dominate anything and everythig.

Now, onto extreme number two....what you've described is pretty much linux distributions. There are literally hundreds of slightly different versions of linux out there, depending on what people want or need. Now, get this....ALL linux software works on ALL distributions. You have your customized OS, and any software you want. You can use ubuntu, which is like the generic "noob-friendly" distro, or something like gentoo, which lets you customize pretty much any part of the system and compiles all the software from scratch for top-performance.

Also, in terms of ease-of-use, there have been many tests where people who have very little experience with computers tried out windows and ubuntu, and guess what? ubuntu won with flying colors each and every time. People just are brainwashed with windows because it's all they know and don't want "change", but in reality, linux is the far superior OS.

Armoured C
Gallente
Noir.
Noir. Mercenary Group
Posted - 2009.02.02 21:11:00 - [36]
 

because it is ported instead of having it own client it shows that it not mainstream

Guillame Herschel
Gallente
NME1
Posted - 2009.02.02 21:14:00 - [37]
 

Just run the Windows Premium client under Crossover Games (http://www.codeweavers.com/compatibility/browse/name/?app_id=1860). It works as well as CCP's Mac Premium client (which is to say, not as good as the Windows Premium client on Windows, but good enough).



armas
Gallente
Black Thorne Corporation
Posted - 2009.02.02 21:16:00 - [38]
 

Wine does a remarkable job of running the Eve premium client, focus bug aside which is extremely easy to workaround. CCP ought to drop advertising Linux support though as the official Linux client is an abomination.

Sythyss
Posted - 2009.02.02 21:17:00 - [39]
 

yeah crossover games is just wine with commercial support

WarlockX
Amarr
Free Trade Corp
Posted - 2009.02.02 21:33:00 - [40]
 

Originally by: Sythyss


Alrighty, for your extreme number one, in my opinion that's pretty bad. Whoever that one company is can dominate anything and everythig.

Now, onto extreme number two....what you've described is pretty much linux distributions. There are literally hundreds of slightly different versions of linux out there, depending on what people want or need. Now, get this....ALL linux software works on ALL distributions. You have your customized OS, and any software you want. You can use ubuntu, which is like the generic "noob-friendly" distro, or something like gentoo, which lets you customize pretty much any part of the system and compiles all the software from scratch for top-performance.

Also, in terms of ease-of-use, there have been many tests where people who have very little experience with computers tried out windows and ubuntu, and guess what? ubuntu won with flying colors each and every time. People just are brainwashed with windows because it's all they know and don't want "change", but in reality, linux is the far superior OS.


You missed the point entirely. Different distributions of linux are not different OS. What I'm talking about is the difference between windows and Mac Os.

If there was hundreds of different OS's like that then the software industry would be ****ed. Software would take ages to write.

You pick a standard and you stick to it, so that other companies can implement software for that standard. You can't go changing the standard every 6 months cause something better came out, then no software would ever get finished. You pick one standard and you improve upon it. Yes its unfortunate Microsoft came first but I want a software industry battle not an OS industry battle.

Corwain
Posted - 2009.02.02 21:37:00 - [41]
 

Now that all 3 operating systems are using Intel programs can be written to run on all 3 operating systems fairly easily. Guess what? The software writers rarely do that! It's not the OS makers fault.

Eventy One
Magellan Exploration and Survey
Mordus Angels
Posted - 2009.02.02 22:17:00 - [42]
 

Originally by: Corwain
To quote SNL's Celebrity Jeopardy parody of Sean Connery: "Gussy it up any way you like lad, the question is does it work?"

And OpenGL does indeed work. DirectX doesn't.


I agree OpenGL works, but OpenGL doesn't support all of the shading functions required by DirectX so its really about the differences between the two (I'm talking about the NVidia driver specifically)

nether void
Caldari
Brotherhood of Suicidal Priests
R.A.G.E
Posted - 2009.02.02 22:22:00 - [43]
 

Linux is disappointing.

Eventy One
Magellan Exploration and Survey
Mordus Angels
Posted - 2009.02.02 22:24:00 - [44]
 

Originally by: nether void
Linux is disappointing.


.. ya .. kind of forces you to have some braincells when you use a computer. Clearly, whoever thought the vast majority of computer users, had braincells clearly should think again.

nether void
Caldari
Brotherhood of Suicidal Priests
R.A.G.E
Posted - 2009.02.02 22:27:00 - [45]
 

Edited by: nether void on 02/02/2009 22:28:02
Originally by: Eventy One
Originally by: nether void
Linux is disappointing.


.. ya .. kind of forces you to have some braincells when you use a computer. Clearly, whoever thought the vast majority of computer users, had braincells clearly should think again.


This is actually why it's disappointing. Target audience is too narrow, hence never get enough market share for anyone to care. Lack of apps. Client side anyway. Sure stick it on every server, but if I see you put it on my clients I'm going to kill you slowly.

*edit* Acutally yeah. Found the problem. Linux and client. Oxymoron right there.

Ticondrius
United Federation Starfleet
Saints Amongst Sinners
Posted - 2009.02.02 22:33:00 - [46]
 

Let's be realistic here. The Linux Client was a publicity stunt and nothing more. Those of us who actually DO play EVE on Linux, do so via wine with the Windows client.

We all know the Linux Client is a piece of trash, so why waste your effort trying to get CCP to do anything about it?

Besides, there's another option too. It's called multi-boot, where you can choose to boot up windows or Linux or whatever other OSes you have installed.

(BTW, I'd LOVE to see a CCP representative try to refute my statement about the linux client being a publicity stunt...Laughing)

Sythyss
Posted - 2009.02.02 22:34:00 - [47]
 

Originally by: WarlockX
Laughing
You can't win this argument because unfortunately life's not fair. It doesn't even matter if Linux is better.


Yes, we know life isn't fair. That's how MS got to where it is today, which is why we're fighting for what is fair, and for what is the better OS.

Originally by: nether void
This is actually why it's disappointing. Target audience is too narrow, hence never get enough market share for anyone to care.


Again, this is just showing ignorance. I've already mentioned that when windows and ubuntu is showed to people who have very little experience with computers, EVERYONE vastly prefers ubuntu, EVERYTIME. It's just people have always used windows, and are lazy and are unwilling to change, and make up stupid excuses like "life isn't fair" to suit them.

Eventy One
Magellan Exploration and Survey
Mordus Angels
Posted - 2009.02.02 22:36:00 - [48]
 

Edited by: Eventy One on 02/02/2009 22:40:16
Originally by: nether void
This is actually why it's disappointing. Target audience is too narrow, hence never get enough market share for anyone to care. Lack of apps. Client side anyway. Sure stick it on every server, but if I see you put it on my clients I'm going to kill you slowly.

*edit* Acutally yeah. Found the problem. Linux and client. Oxymoron right there.


Well those who enjoy Linux would disagree. Linux was never meant for a wide audience. It was meant:

  • For users who wanted Unix to run on x86 hardware

  • To be open source

  • To not be propitiatory & thus able to be modified by those using it

  • To be a secure OS

  • To implement the features of modular OS without losing the benefits of a monolithic kernel

  • To perform well enough to be considered for the enterprise


I think your view of what Linux was suppose to do is a bit off. Popularity was not on the list. Having said that, if you think the only way to gauge popularity is what people use on their desktop, again I'd say your view of things is a bit mixed up.

You should google LAMP (Linux Apache MySQL PHP) for a glimpse at what infrastructure is most popular in terms of running network sites. I can tell you it isn't from Microsoft.

But again ... I don't expect the target audience you likely represent to understand any of this.

Rex Lashar
Amarr
Posted - 2009.02.02 22:39:00 - [49]
 

Edited by: Rex Lashar on 02/02/2009 22:44:45
Christ you people are stupid. Linux developers can write their own implementation, but they can't simply dump the latest DX distributables and call it a day. Not only are there serious OS dependencies, but proprietary commercial code is protected by copyright law. It would essentially amount to piracy.

Wine, Transgaming's Cedega/Cider are all custom implementations of DirectX (thus stepping around the legal issue) but they are created by basically trying to reverse engineer the inner workings of DirectX. If you do a DX API call, you can change the parameters to get a predictable result but as far as how its actually implemented on a low level may differ from your best assumptions and guesses.

Hence, any DX compatability layer on Linux tends to lag seriously in features (Wine 1.0 just barely supports all features of DX9 now?) and have many minor bugs due to the differences of implementation. So blame these issues for why your Linux/Mac clients suck.

CCP's only true solution for proper cross platform support is OpenGL, but that was mismanaged for a long time. Even when the Khoronos Group finally took over to end the endless vendor bickering, they haven't managed to do a serious overhaul. Adoption rate among CAD/3D software developers is high, but the only major game engine that uses it is from ID software (John Carmack). To make OpenGL attractive again, they'll have to go through a painful break just like DX9/10 did.

Meanwhile, DX11 is past that hump and bringing some nice things with it, while remaining a superset of DX10. CCP doesn't have much choice, unless the Khoronos Group pulls a rabbit from where the sun don't shine, or the SGI rendering pipeline model dies completely. Both could happen after DX11, but you're looking at over five years from now. So maybe Trinity 3 will be fully cross platform.

edit: almost forgot; the people who are saying that Classic was dropped because CCP didn't wanna support a second client.. well not exactly true. If they aim to remain competitive in the next few years, they can't afford to wait around and see if DirectX magically disappears.

Go read the blogs on the new Trinity engine, they were developing a 9.0c 'classic' variant and a DX10 variant. Trinity Premium was always going to be for Vista, and they were always going to support 2 code paths. The only reason they dumped DX10 is because of the low penetration rate. So essentially Classic was dumped so that Trinity Premium can become the new Classic - as intended, and they can begin work on a DX10/11 engine to be the new premium experience.

nether void
Caldari
Brotherhood of Suicidal Priests
R.A.G.E
Posted - 2009.02.02 22:47:00 - [50]
 

Originally by: Eventy One
Stuff


If linux was never intended for a wide audience, how can it also have a large market share? Cause it's free? That would be about it. If you work with the client at all, learn MS. Market share is better than perfection. Bill Gates can attest to this.

Most businesses run MS clients, so learning non-MS client stuff is a waste of time.

Linux - Great for the backend
MS - Great for the frontend

Eventy One
Magellan Exploration and Survey
Mordus Angels
Posted - 2009.02.02 22:57:00 - [51]
 

Originally by: nether void
Originally by: Eventy One
Stuff


If linux was never intended for a wide audience, how can it also have a large market share? Cause it's free? That would be about it. If you work with the client at all, learn MS. Market share is better than perfection. Bill Gates can attest to this.

Most businesses run MS clients, so learning non-MS client stuff is a waste of time.

Linux - Great for the backend
MS - Great for the frontend


This is the beauty of it .. because Linux was never meant to be popular, it hasn't dumbed down the OS.

Because it hasn't dumbed down the OS, it does most things better than its commercial counter parts. I've personally bench marked the eve client in both Windows and Linux (in Classical graphics mode), and my frame rate per second is, on average 33% higher in linux than in windows.

That is using the same windows binary (except wrapped in wine under linux). In theory it should be slower in linux than windows because its running natively (i.e. not wrapped in wine). There are other metrics too that point to better performance in linux.

Fact is, Linux is efficient, with wide-support from broader computer using community for the simple fact it is a better OS. I long abandoned any MS product years ago and have never looked back. I know computer-illiterate people abandoning MS office in favour of Open Office not only because its free, but because it employs open stardards.

If Linux is not popular with you .. and your crowd .. cool.

WarlockX
Amarr
Free Trade Corp
Posted - 2009.02.02 23:13:00 - [52]
 

Ok you keep telling yourself it's better.

I'll be playing crysis with dx10 graphics. oh what's that you can't play that on linux? Oh shoot, well at least it's a better OS.

The better OS for me is the one that works. Laughing

Frug
Omega Wing
Snatch Victory
Posted - 2009.02.02 23:18:00 - [53]
 

Originally by: Corwain

And Linux is mainstream nowadays.


Hi. I live in a fantasy land where what I wish was true is true.


Devilspawn666
Posted - 2009.02.02 23:23:00 - [54]
 

Speaking to the issue of Wine running EVE better than Transgaming's Cedega, it comes down the fact that Transgaming also owns Cider which is being used for the Mac Client. They would naturally start where there is the most money to be made, which is Mac as nearly 10% of the market is Mac users, compared to less than 1% Linux. Mac users have less customization than Linux users, so they assume Linux users can work around some of the issues to get the performance how they want it, within reason. Another part is Wine has been in development for a much longer time, and is better able to emulate a Windows environment to run the programs.

On the issue of all the OSes, pretty much any OS that rose to power instead of Windows would be pretty much the same as it is now. As it stands the line between PC and Mac is blurring, and Linux it gaining popularity as people become more fluent in computer use. The big barrier to entry with computer use was user friendliness. We all know the older computers required a lot of commands to use and do anything, then Windows came out and made things easier so more people could use a computer easily and it grew. Linux is now coming along that way, as it is becoming easier to use, but it still has some of the stigma behind it of its elitism, and how its users are really skilled programmers and 'computer geeks' that scares some people away. I've played with Ubuntu Linux a bit and it is very user friendly and easy enough to use. The downside was doing some things were tricky like getting the wireless drivers to work on it, and sound was sketchy (6.06 LTS). Granted in 8.04 64-bit it works like a dream on my new machine (couldn't get 32-bit to work), it still requires extra work that other people may not have the patience for. Most computer users want something that just works, and know when they install a new program, it will work as described with minimal fiddling with settings and such.

Finally, most the people I know that run Linux have dual boots on all their machines with the exception of my friend's server which is running Ubuntu for servers. It is possible to work without Windows, but in a world dominated by it, you are likely to miss out on some things.

Corwain
Posted - 2009.02.02 23:37:00 - [55]
 

Originally by: WarlockX
Ok you keep telling yourself it's better.

I'll be playing crysis with dx10 graphics. oh what's that you can't play that on linux? Oh shoot, well at least it's a better OS.


1. You're bragging about being able to play a crap EA game? Laughing
2. You know the 360 can play Crisis too, does that make it superior to a PC?

Par'Gellen
Gallente
Neon Cranium
Posted - 2009.02.02 23:49:00 - [56]
 

How did a thread about linux reach this many posts? Isn't that more people than actually use it?

Glengrant
Beyond Limited
Posted - 2009.02.02 23:52:00 - [57]
 

There seems to be a lot of confusion around here and throwing insults and making up stuff is not helping.

1. DirectX (the API) can and has been ported to Linux by the good folks of the wine project. Thanks to them I have been playing EVE on Linux for over 3 years.

2. Wine "only" makes the environment look familiar to a windows app. Most of the actual features (writing files, playing sounds, network services, etc...) are already available in Linux and wine "just" maps windows api calls to the appropriate Linux equivalent. This will often just be a very thin translation between windows function w (p1, p2, p3) and linux function l (p1, p3, p2).

3. When EVE runs on wine it *does* use OpenGL as that is used to implement DirectX on wine.

4. There are no doubt a number of places were the mapping layer is not so thin and the apis differ enough that quite a bit of code has to shuffle stuff around - but I didn't notice much difference between windows and linux speed while I still had a windows partition (got wiped a year ago).

5. Any company that supports several OS would develop or aquire an os abstraction layer into it's app to insulate most of the app from os differences and keep development easier and cleaner. Just take the windows api as that abstraction layer (that just happens to look exactly like the api of one of the OS - shrug). A large part is python anyway, the rest is mostly opengl or generic x86 clib code. For most practical purposes eve running on wine (or wrapped with cedega lib) *is* a native application.

6. Only heard about the focus bug - EVE runs fullscreen within wine window here - which looks exactly like a windowed client would on windows. Problem solved. Alt-tabbing, copy/paste, etc... - all works fine and has been for *years*.

7. People still make silly remarks about Linux that are based on stuff that is 5-10 years old. I never recompiled my kernels on this laptop. I never compiled a driver or any app I'm using here. I have a fully accelerated nice looking desktop with cool effects that make Vista look clunky and old and is at least on par with Mac (I very much dislike the global menu bar of the Mac). Nobody has to use the command like to get everyday stuff done on a modern Linux distro. There are about 20k free apps in the Ubbuntu/Debian repos. Installing them is easier and less hassle than using windows setup.exe. All apps get updates from central location - not just os itself.

Dell statistics would list me as a windows user - even though I wiped that off my hard disk and havent used that MS Win licence in a couple of years.

That CCP introduced a linux (and Mac) client was a nice gesture. Thanks.
But IMHO it's time to stop bothering with the Cedega wrapper. They can't keep up with the fast wine development anymore. Wine has been supporting premium since a few weeks after Trinity while Cedega still can't do it.

Better to invest the same resources into helping test and patch wine before every patch and provide nice packages for Ubuntu/Debian, Red Hat/Fedora and Suse (RH and Suse use the same packaging anyway).

p.s. As much as I'm a fan of Linux it's silly to claim it's mainstream (yet :-) ). It's ready for mainstream use though (most people only use a word processor and browser anyway) and has been for a while. When my GF recently got a new computer I installed Ubuntu with Wubi as a boot option. I started it for her once when Vista couldn't write a CD out of the box. She hasn't bothered to boot windows since then.

Eventy One
Magellan Exploration and Survey
Mordus Angels
Posted - 2009.02.02 23:56:00 - [58]
 

Originally by: WarlockX
Ok you keep telling yourself it's better.

I'll be playing crysis with dx10 graphics. oh what's that you can't play that on linux? Oh shoot, well at least it's a better OS.

The better OS for me is the one that works. Laughing


I love the hostility it receives ... its a sign that it is a threat.

You don't like linux? You're absolutely free not too - that doesn't, however, make it any less a good OS.

Very Happy

Kagura Nikon
Minmatar
Emptiness.
Posted - 2009.02.02 23:57:00 - [59]
 

Originally by: Rex Lashar
There's that, there's also the part where even OpenGL 3.0 doesn't bring parity between the two APIs.

So it's not just a matter of laziness, CCP are on record that their coders would much rather be working with OpenGL anyway. Trinity 2 being DX9.0c is probably just a stopgap measure. What interests me is what they're going to do next. DX11 will probably have the adoption rate Vista never did, and it leaves OpenGL in the dust (even with OpenCL 1.0). Even if Larrabee takes off, writing a software engine in C/C++ makes you hardware dependent.

So right now their choices are:

- crappy graphics and great cross platform support (OpenGL)
- better graphics with crappy cross platform support (DX9.0c)

And in the future it might be:

- much better graphics and even worse cross platform support (DX11)
- archaic graphics and great cross platform support (OpenGL)
- ridiculously amazing effects that only run on one hardware part and probably not very fast (Larrabee)

Yeahhhhh...


not true. As a OpenGL developer I must dsay. OpenGL support on CORE all DX 9 features, OpenGL 3 support almost all DX10 features on Core. And ALL features within the non core extensions (the geometry shaders). In fact the first demos of DX10 class hardware were deployed in OpenGL WAY before windows VISta or DX10 was released.

Opengl an do EVERYTHING that DX10. Although a few features are more complex to implement in OpenGL>

Jaabaa
Minmatar
Dental Drilling Corporation
Posted - 2009.02.03 00:12:00 - [60]
 

DirectX is not comparable with OpenGL. Direct3D on the other hand is, IMHO.

As I understand it, the DirectX API also provides support for sound and controllers. I'm not sure if linux even provides a consolidated API set for games programming.

Getting into a platform discussion is pointless.

The simple fact is, the EVE (cedega) client for linux pretty much sucks and, from what I've been reading, people are getting better results using the free WineX implementation with the windows native client. This, IMO, is what has to be addressed by CCP and TransGaming.


Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7

This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 


The new forums are live

Please adjust your bookmarks to https://forums.eveonline.com

These forums are archived and read-only