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

WarlockX
Amarr
Free Trade Corp
Posted - 2009.02.03 04:11:00 - [91]
 

Edited by: WarlockX on 03/02/2009 04:12:34
it's ok you can drive your ford if you really want. just don't tell ppl its a better car cause you gotta be smarter to drive it.

Corwain
Posted - 2009.02.03 04:13:00 - [92]
 

Now you're mixing your metaphors.

WarlockX
Amarr
Free Trade Corp
Posted - 2009.02.03 04:20:00 - [93]
 

not really. lol. linux is the ford/honda of OS's its very customizable.

Where as a porche can't be customized as much. So i guess it sucks :(

Corwain
Posted - 2009.02.03 04:25:00 - [94]
 

No, both your metaphors were about cars, but they were different metaphors, thus they got easily mixed.

First you're talking about how much one car breaks down vs. another.

Then you started talking about "fancyness" vs "commonplace" of cars.

But you went from one to the other without breaking stride and thus mixed the two together.

Yakgar
Posted - 2009.02.03 04:27:00 - [95]
 

linux is kind of like a mac
only good for like 1 thing
yeah kuz i mean what r u gonna do on a linux system?
surf the net really fast?
set up a server?
host webspace?
how exciting!
sure it's faster and more secure
but come on

Corwain
Posted - 2009.02.03 04:34:00 - [96]
 

I edit movies on Linux
I edit audio on Linux
I do image manipulation on Linux
I do music sequencing on Linux
I play computer games quite a lot on Linux
I do word processing/spreadsheets on Linux
I instant message on AOL, ICQ, Yahoo and MSN on Linux using a single program for all (it also supports Jabber, Meanwhile, GroupWise and a crap-ton of other protocols too)
I watch Hulu on Linux
I use EFT and EVEMon on Linux
I burn media on Linux
I download torrents on Linux
I watch video on linux, from DVDs to wmvs to other misc video formats

And yes, I do browse the web really fast on Linux as well

Yakgar
Posted - 2009.02.03 04:48:00 - [97]
 

Edited by: Yakgar on 03/02/2009 04:51:44
Originally by: Corwain
I edit movies on Linux
I edit audio on Linux
I do image manipulation on Linux
I do music sequencing on Linux
I play computer games quite a lot on Linux
I do word processing/spreadsheets on Linux
I instant message on AOL, ICQ, Yahoo and MSN on Linux using a single program for all (it also supports Jabber, Meanwhile, GroupWise and a crap-ton of other protocols too)
I watch Hulu on Linux
I use EFT and EVEMon on Linux
I burn media on Linux
I download torrents on Linux
I watch video on linux, from DVDs to wmvs to other misc video formats

And yes, I do browse the web really fast on Linux as well


how exciting!
yeah what games?
those ones that come with the OS? lol

Sythyss
Posted - 2009.02.03 05:12:00 - [98]
 

Originally by: Yakgar
how exciting!yeah what games?
those ones that come with the OS? lol


wtf is wrong with you? stop talking about things you know absolutely nothing about. the majority of windows games work fine on linux

Corwain
Posted - 2009.02.03 05:18:00 - [99]
 

http://appdb.winehq.org/ for a list of windows games and how they work running on Linux with the latest version of Wine

Some highlights:
Fallout 3
Portal
CoD: 4
CS: Source
BioShock
Photoshop
Steam
StarCraft
Baldurs Gate 2

Flesh Eater
Posted - 2009.02.03 06:25:00 - [100]
 

I don't get why people are saying that if Eve used OpenGL, it wouldn't look as nice...

Running through Wine (which turns the DirectX into OpenGL calls), I can't tell the difference from running natively under windows. Considering the game is written in Python, it seems bizarre that they haven't written it to be cross-platform.

Since Microsoft have effectively discontinued DirectX on Windows XP, rather than split into seperate DirectX 9 and 10+ graphics engines, CCP should switch to OpenGL and future proof the game.

BTW Blizzard always allows OpenGL rendering in their games (Warcraft3, WoW) - I guess needed as they support Mac natively.

James Holcomb
Caldari
104th Ranger Mobile Combat Regiment
C.H.A.L.I.C.E.
Posted - 2009.02.03 06:44:00 - [101]
 

Linux, it's like shaving with a bowling pin.

wickedpheonix
Caldari
Guy Fawkes Trust Fund
31ST Reliables Division
Posted - 2009.02.03 06:52:00 - [102]
 

Linux is like one of those old junky American cars - they're reliable as hell (rock-solid stability) but virtually no one knows how to repair them (how many Linux geeks do you know?) and parts (programs) are hard to get. Also, it's damn ugly compared with modern cars (i.e. multi-touch support in Linux? Windows games don't work out-of-the-box, driver problems for specialized machines (like Tablet PCs and the associative hardware, that feeling of, "oh look at me, I'm such a nice person because I'm eating soy cheese and drinking a soy milkshake", and then you actually taste it and it's not like the old, polished soul food you're used to (i.e. differences between OpenOffice and MS Office).

Honestly, what's wrong with Windows? What can you do in Linux that you can't do in Windows? Just practice safe surfing and there's nothing wrong with Windows.

Tiirae
The 5th Freedom
Wildly Inappropriate.
Posted - 2009.02.03 08:11:00 - [103]
 

Originally by: Sythyss
that was a response to someone mentioning how much a bother linux was to use -.-

and I still don't see your response to my earlier post


Uh, you were replying to me when you said that, although I never said that Linux was a bother to use. it's not, and none of my arguments against it have anything at all to do with usability.

After all, if linux was difficult to use, it wouldnt be the basis for 90% f all embedded operating systems, would it?

Anyway, you keep rolling out this 'fact' that in a blind test, people choose ubuntu over windows.

Please link to the source in your next post, or never mention it again.

The numerous posts her by Linux fans just kind of reinforce the point I was trying to make in my first comment - they are all busy saying how much it can do and how easy it is, yet none of them realise that nobody is disagreeing with them.

People don't care what it can do, or how many cool things it does, how much it costs or how good it looks. It isn't windows. That's why 95% of people don't and won't use it. Look at that moron woman in the US a couple of weeks ago who bought a Dell with Ubuntu by accident. She FLUNKED her semester at college because of it.

- She couldn't install the 'internet' on the CD verizon had given her
- She couldn't write her papers in Word, so she didn't submit any

I know, it's hilariously stupid, she could easily has found someone at college to configure her net connection, and OO.ORG can easily create word-format docs. But it's just the way people are. You can't change them. Stop trying.

Please link to source for ubuntu-is-preferred-over-windows case study.

Glengrant
Beyond Limited
Posted - 2009.02.03 09:23:00 - [104]
 

To my fellow Linux enthusiasts: Please stop mentioning widgets and configurable dekstops as Linux advantages - Windows can do almost all of that too - there's plenty of cool extensions for windows available.

Also Linux is not 100% safe from virus - it just feels that way compared to windows. :-)

That Linux runs most games just fine is an exaggeration. Actually gaming is the primary weak point of Linux at this point. IMHO there's 2 groups of users left that have trouble with Linux at this point:
a) Gamers that want to go into a shop and grab that new cool game from shelf and be reasonable safe in assuming it will run out of the box.
b) Business users with special inhouse apps and stuff like excel macro libraries and other office extensions that won't run in OO.

Having said that Linux runs many games just fine - but the newer ones often take a few weeks/months for wine to catch up. That doesn't bother me - but is not good enough for a hardcore gamer. Also it helps to have the right garphics card (in short nvidia, fast intel, or carefully selected ati).

What the windows users here get very wrong is Linux and the regular user:
That lady didn't flunk her semester because of Ubuntu - she just used that as a silly excuse. It doesn't take months to
a) find a friend/nerd herd :-) guy to connect her internet and show her how she can save a doc from OO.
or
b) just get windows installed if she lives on an island or has no friends at all.
Usually most people have somebody around them they use as free tech support (geek friend, nephew, whoever) who otherwise cleans stuff from their windows machines.

I have done a lot of "tech support" for friends/family on their windows machines. Windows degrades and most people tend to aquire random flotsam from browsing or trying some stuff they got from a magazine or site. It doesn't matter if my brother-in-law, sister and niece or the mother of a friend runs windows or not - they don't upgrade their graphics cards themselves usually - nor do they know how to find/configure an anti-virus program that doesn't rob their machines of 20% of their power. I get a lot of help requests from regular windows users.

When we talk about regular users that don't want to change, use computers not for fun but just to get some regular things done we're talking exactly about the kind of people for whom Linux is ready now and has been for a few years. You install it for them once, they can browse, watch movies/youtube, write letters, print and all that in relative safety on less expensive machines. They start the program with a double-click and typing letters is the same regardless of the os. They already used firefox anyway.

It's the power user with 7 years worth of specially tuned excel sheets that has trouble switching platforms - even if that would save a ton of money in his business.

Linux already dominates the server market (you don't think Google indexes the internet on a zillion expensive windows servers - do you), it big on appliances and other embedded devices. It's gaining market share in cell phones and the netbook part of the mobile market.

It's getting on plenty of desktops in governments and some big companies too.

And Office 2007 looks less familiar to regular users than OO at this point.

SirFett
Best Path Inc.
Atlas Alliance
Posted - 2009.02.03 09:57:00 - [105]
 

tend to agree with most of what gelngrant sayd exept

Originally by: Glengrant


It's the power user with 7 years worth of specially tuned excel sheets that has trouble switching platforms - even if that would save a ton of money in his business.




no it doesnt
as somebody sayd non tech/computer savvy people do have people who know a bit or who know other people who ....

now when you look at your friends and family phone list for linux support, the herd gets very thin indeed

a medium sized bussiness cannot afford to employ 2 guys out of a mere handfull viable persons
also the high customisability of linux starts getting in the way
because only the 2 people you hired got a clue what they have done
at some point you will be without those... and then what ?
in the windows sector you snap your finger and your mailbox is littered with capable persons and your wallet wont be taxed that hard
with linux your mailbox will feel very lonly and your wallet will cry in agony

its not about how much does it cost in aquiring
its more about how much does it cost in the long run and how much will servicing cost and how well does it integrate with program xyz and program zyx etc blablabla


Professor Jinmei
Posted - 2009.02.03 10:03:00 - [106]
 

Originally by: Corwain
I edit movies on Linux
I edit audio on Linux
I do image manipulation on Linux
I do music sequencing on Linux
I play computer games quite a lot on Linux
I do word processing/spreadsheets on Linux
I instant message on AOL, ICQ, Yahoo and MSN on Linux using a single program for all (it also supports Jabber, Meanwhile, GroupWise and a crap-ton of other protocols too)
I watch Hulu on Linux
I use EFT and EVEMon on Linux
I burn media on Linux
I download torrents on Linux
I watch video on linux, from DVDs to wmvs to other misc video formats

And yes, I do browse the web really fast on Linux as well


god damn it, never thought about running EVEMon on my linux!!Mad
I always went to 'My Character' menu here to see some stuff Sad

Kaivos
Pyydys
Posted - 2009.02.03 10:06:00 - [107]
 

Originally by: Khorkrak
Why isn't there a premium graphics version of the linux client? Instead we're stuck having to run the windoze one in windowed mode via wine in order to be able to consistently switch to other processes due to a weird focus related bug. Running the linux client itself is so-so as it's only full screen mode & classic graphics + you end up with this strange situation if the in-game browser launches your default browser with more than 2 tabs typically where you end up not being able to clear anywhere on the browser yet it's the topmost window - grrrrr.

The code is written in python with c++ extensions. Being cross-platform shouldn't be such a challenging issue as python is built with that in mind. Naturally using libraries that are os specific makes things hard such as directx. Why go with that over OpenGL? Is there really something that good about it?



Quoted the OP, just to remind you guys what this thread is about.

As all linux threads where windows is mentioned, this thread is fallen in to a linux fanboy marketing "all the cool things" they do with their OS.

Is for my own opinion they should cut the whole linux client off and reassign those resources to the main windows premium client and general game development.

The few 2% who use linux can dualboot to windows or use wine just as easily.

::flame on crazy loud internet linux users.

ElJoeb
Posted - 2009.02.03 10:52:00 - [108]
 

Originally by: Kaivos
Originally by: Khorkrak
Why isn't there a premium graphics version of the linux client? Instead we're stuck having to run the windoze one in windowed mode via wine in order to be able to consistently switch to other processes due to a weird focus related bug. Running the linux client itself is so-so as it's only full screen mode & classic graphics + you end up with this strange situation if the in-game browser launches your default browser with more than 2 tabs typically where you end up not being able to clear anywhere on the browser yet it's the topmost window - grrrrr.

The code is written in python with c++ extensions. Being cross-platform shouldn't be such a challenging issue as python is built with that in mind. Naturally using libraries that are os specific makes things hard such as directx. Why go with that over OpenGL? Is there really something that good about it?





Quoted the OP, just to remind you guys what this thread is about.

As all linux threads where windows is mentioned, this thread is fallen in to a linux fanboy marketing "all the cool things" they do with their OS.

Is for my own opinion they should cut the whole linux client off and reassign those resources to the main windows premium client and general game development.

The few 2% who use linux can dualboot to windows or use wine just as easily.

::flame on crazy loud internet linux users.


I agree. Linux users are a resilient bunch and soooner or later they will find a way to play a game on their OS. It happened before the "official" support and will happen afterward.

Oh, and this topic needs to be renamed "Linux Flame War/Circle Jerk" so everyone knows what they're getting into.

Glengrant
Beyond Limited
Posted - 2009.02.03 11:42:00 - [109]
 

Originally by: Kaivos

::flame on crazy loud internet linux users.


You do see the irony here? :-)

ollobrains2
Gallente
New Eve Order Holdings
Posted - 2009.02.03 11:46:00 - [110]
 

linux needs ongoing eve support

Glengrant
Beyond Limited
Posted - 2009.02.03 12:04:00 - [111]
 

Originally by: SirFett

Originally by: Glengrant

It's the power user with 7 years worth of specially tuned excel sheets that has trouble switching platforms - even if that would save a ton of money in his business.




no it doesnt


We have to differentiate.
I agree partly that a small shop where tech support is done in a minimal way on the side by 1 half-competent employee or owner is not actually saving money with Linux. The added trouble of unfamiliarity is usually not worth saving a few thousand bucks.

At this point I'm talking mostly about big companies (they hire dedicated tech people anyway - and already have unix-savvy people for their servers).

Those and government departments is where linux is already gradually replacing windows.

But even small shops can profit if they just happen to have a linux guy available. I'm doing the tech support for a friends small company and they don't see much difference. Windows server replaced by Linux - they still have windows shares they get their files from - they still use Outlook (not because of features - just because its familiar and already paid for).

Originally by: SirFett
as somebody sayd non tech/computer savvy people do have people who know a bit or who know other people who ....

now when you look at your friends and family phone list for linux support, the herd gets very thin indeed
Originally by: SirFett


True - for now. Linux competence is spreading though.

Originally by: SirFett
a medium sized bussiness cannot afford to employ 2 guys out of a mere handfull viable persons


Depends on local circumstances. And paying all those windows licenses and extra hardware upgrades ain't fun either.

Originally by: SirFett
also the high customisability of linux starts getting in the way


Not true. Both windows and linux are flexible. At the extreme end linux is more flexible - but that is hardly relevant in most day to day situations.

In neither case do you have to go crazy with customization. Just because it's there and can be done does not mean you have to. There's plenty of tools to pimp up the windows desktop, make it 3D and change it beyond recognition. Yet most people don't do that. And the same is true for Linux.
You install Windows XP, maybe play a bit with the quickbar and change wallpaper and screensaver.
You install Ubuntu, maybe play a bit with the panel and change wallpaper and screensaver.
In that regard they are the same from a normal users point of view.

Originally by: SirFett
because only the 2 people you hired got a clue what they have done


There's no fundamental difference here between windows and a modern linux system either.
You use the default system with whatever apps you need - or you have some complicated needs that need customization. In both cases the geeks that configured it either wrote a lot of infos for others to understand - or they are the only people with a clue.

Originally by: SirFett
at some point you will be without those... and then what ?


You're in trouble.
At that point you hire an expert to get this fixed.
It doesn't matter if it's a windows mess or a linux mess.

Originally by: SirFett
in the windows sector you snap your finger and your mailbox is littered with capable persons and your wallet wont be taxed that hard


Yup. Agreed. Windows admins will generally be greater in numbers. Hourly rates will likely be lower for everage windows admin. Average competence is likely to be lower too as everybody and his brother thinks he's as admin when he configured something on a system.
Anyway, paying 20% more or less per hour in such a situation is rarely a big issue.

Originally by: SirFett
with linux your mailbox will feel very lonly and your wallet will cry in agony


Funny :-) - but also slightly exaggerated.

Glengrant
Beyond Limited
Posted - 2009.02.03 12:31:00 - [112]
 

Edited by: Glengrant on 03/02/2009 12:32:52
Originally by: SirFett
its not about how much does it cost in aquiring
its more about how much does it cost in the long run and how much will servicing cost and how well does it integrate with program xyz and program zyx etc blablabla



Total agreement.
But you don't pay windows software just once either.
MS is busy making you upgrade windows and/or office as often as they can. Every time your business expands you have to buy more CALs for the additional users.
Need a quick install of a machine in a VM - yet another license to pay.
You have to pay for tech support either way.

The current wave of putting server side stuff in VM to save resources and gain flexibilty alone will make sure that Linux expands further.
First the host system doesn't do much except manage the VM host environment. No point in paying expensive windows licenses for that.
Next why would you want your primitive file server on na costly windows system when a default linux version with samba looks the same to your users anyway?

Every time you don't know how many servers you'll need and want to be ready to test - it's so much better to be able tgo *legally* make an instant clone and just run another VM.

On the client side - most office computers don't need anything special. They run something where a mail program and word processor gets started on. Either is likely to be maximized at any time. Doesn't really matter much what OS is below that and you don't need fancy customization for any of this.

The mom and pop stuff is exactly where Linux already shines and windows is an utter waste of money and resources.

Customization (e.g. 7 years worth of Excel macro libs) and games (grab from shelf and play) is where people are locked into windows (for now :-) ).

Todays Linux is nothing like it used to be a few years ago.
It evolves much faster than windows.
Tmorrows Linux will be even better and easier than todays.

It used to be that installing apps involved downloading source in a tar.gz, compile, configure.
Now it's easier and cleaner than windows installs.

It used to be that most hardware was not supported or needed a lot of hacker tuning. Nowadays a lot works out of the box. True story: My GF got a new comp a couple months ago. Had Vista on it - already too different looking from XP for her taste. Was pre-installed - but burning CDs didn't work right away. Could probably have fixed that by hunting for updated drivers and googling log entries.
But I installed Ubuntu with Wubi (so she can still easily start Vista if she wants to) - all hardware worked fine right away - including CD burning.

She uses Firefox and OO - exactly the same way as she would on windows. EMule is running via wine. To her there's almost no difference in the handling of her computer. She never bothered to boot back into Vista.
Neither she nor I edited and config files, or compiled anything. Just a few clicks to select packages. Not even much of that as Firefox and OO come with basic OS install.

Well - one difference - she is safer from malware.

That computer is in her apartment 400 km away from me - I have not touched that machine since installation time. I get no panic calls about stuff that doesn't work.

Both of us would appear as windows users in sales statistics. Most (what is now) Linux computers where bought with a windows license - we usually don't get the option to buy without windows.

Yup - Linux Zealots derail such threads as this. With equal help from windows apologists. ;-)

Yup many Linux fans go overboard in their comparisons (windows can't be made look cool or is not customizable) - so do windows fans (Linux hardly ever works and needs constant expert handholding or is too hard to use).

Ryoji Tanakama
Caldari
Indicium Technologies
Hephaestus Forge Alliance
Posted - 2009.02.03 12:50:00 - [113]
 

Originally by: Corwain


And Linux is mainstream nowadays.


No it's not.

It's a tiny minority of home users. Linux's biggest uptake is in the virtualisation and web-facing server fronts. business users with specific tasks that require more versatility in their operating system than Windows generally allows.

This is way beyond the requirements of any home user.

A home user uses linux primarily due to cost, and if this is not the factor then irrational microsoft-hatred or a nerd-chubby is about the only reason left. The problem as highlighted in other posts is compatibility. Why would I build a 1000 gaming rig and then install Linux knowing I can't play many games and those I can are going to run badly?

You run windows in the knowledge that it's stable (I havent had a windows crash I didn't cause through stupidity in... well since I was running 98) has excellent support for gamers and will be regularly and easily updated.

Linux may be windows closest competitor, but in the home user market it is still an irrelevance.

Tallaran Kouros
Cryptonym Sleepers
Posted - 2009.02.03 13:05:00 - [114]
 

Edited by: Tallaran Kouros on 03/02/2009 13:05:12

Quote:

No it's not.

It's a tiny minority of home users. Linux's biggest uptake is in the virtualisation and web-facing server fronts. business users with specific tasks that require more versatility in their operating system than Windows generally allows.



Quote:

This is way beyond the requirements of any home user.

A home user uses linux primarily due to cost, and if this is not the factor then irrational microsoft-hatred or a nerd-chubby is about the only reason left. The problem as highlighted in other posts is compatibility. Why would I build a 1000 gaming rig and then install Linux knowing I can't play many games and those I can are going to run badly?



Well done on taking two completely different edge-cases and proving nothing.

The vast majority of windows users send email, browse the web, listen to music and write the occasional letter.

This is true no matter if you are a business user or any member of my family and it would make not a jot of difference if they ran Linux or Windows.

The point you have made (and I suspect the exact opposite of what you intended to prove) is that in edge-cases such as running a server then Linux is a clear win, and in other edge-cases such as a high-powered gaming machine then Windows is what you want.

For the vast majority of middle-of-the-road users, they could just as easily run Windows or Linux and it wouldn't make a bit of difference to them, especially if they were running platform neutral apps like Firefox or Open Office.

Ryoji Tanakama
Caldari
Indicium Technologies
Hephaestus Forge Alliance
Posted - 2009.02.03 13:10:00 - [115]
 

Originally by: Tallaran Kouros
Edited by: Tallaran Kouros on 03/02/2009 13:05:12

Quote:

No it's not.

It's a tiny minority of home users. Linux's biggest uptake is in the virtualisation and web-facing server fronts. business users with specific tasks that require more versatility in their operating system than Windows generally allows.



Quote:

This is way beyond the requirements of any home user.

A home user uses linux primarily due to cost, and if this is not the factor then irrational microsoft-hatred or a nerd-chubby is about the only reason left. The problem as highlighted in other posts is compatibility. Why would I build a 1000 gaming rig and then install Linux knowing I can't play many games and those I can are going to run badly?



Well done on taking two completely different edge-cases and proving nothing.

The vast majority of windows users send email, browse the web, listen to music and write the occasional letter.

This is true no matter if you are a business user or any member of my family and it would make not a jot of difference if they ran Linux or Windows.

The point you have made (and I suspect the exact opposite of what you intended to prove) is that in edge-cases such as running a server then Linux is a clear win, and in other edge-cases such as a high-powered gaming machine then Windows is what you want.

For the vast majority of middle-of-the-road users, they could just as easily run Windows or Linux and it wouldn't make a bit of difference to them, especially if they were running platform neutral apps like Firefox or Open Office.


Well... um... no.

Linux still despite what you might say requires a much higher level of technical knowledge than windows.... hence your editing out of:

Quote:

You run windows in the knowledge that it's stable (I havent had a windows crash I didn't cause through stupidity in... well since I was running 98) has excellent support for gamers and will be regularly and easily updated.



Anyone can install Windows on x hardware config and in 99% of cases it will run. I can remember having to **** around with Linux for hours to get intel chipset support in Ubuntu recently.

So no, reliability and ease of use in windows still makes it a more attractive option for all those tasks you mention. So for the average user it's the difference between frustration and ease of use, and Windows comes out on top.

Par'Gellen
Gallente
Neon Cranium
Posted - 2009.02.03 13:46:00 - [116]
 

Windows this, Linux that, what's a Mac?, blah blah blah.

If you think end users like us determine industry standards like Windows then you are sadly sadly mistaken.

Listen, it's all about the Total Cost of Ownership. Sure Linux is free on the front end but supporting it in a large scale production environment is a rediculously expensive nightmare involving insanely overpaid consultants and/or insanely overpaid employees. This is why Linux will never be mainstream. I know, I've been there done that got the T-shirt (I really do lol! It says "I survived a migration from Linux!").

You Linux guys can argue your chosen OS's "superiority" till you are blue in the face, and some of it may actually be true, but it doesn't change the fact that no large business with even a single IT guy with half a brain is going to choose it for the desktop OS for his people.

Server or niche, sure, but even then you run the risk of the guy that set it up leaving and you being stuck with something everyone stands around scratching their head over. Got that T-shirt too.

Industry standards like Windows and other Microsoft products are a GOOD thing in the computer world and they are there for a very good reason. It has nothing to do with functionality or popularity or freeness.

If you choose to run some obscure OS that you can count the total users of on two hands then be my guest. Hell, you can even write your own! Just don't come whining on the forums when nobody knows or cares what the crap you are talking about.

Primnproper
Posted - 2009.02.03 14:02:00 - [117]
 

Originally by: WarlockX
Edited by: WarlockX on 02/02/2009 19:07:34Get a main stream operating system for god sakes.

Theres no point in having the best operating system in the universe it it doesn't run anything at all.

my OS never crashes.
wow, thats amazing what software can it run.
nothing..


QFT!!!!!!

Maria Kalista
Amarr
Knights of Kador
Posted - 2009.02.03 14:11:00 - [118]
 

Edited by: Maria Kalista on 03/02/2009 14:11:43
Originally by: Par'Gellen


If you choose to run some obscure OS that you can count the total users of on two hands then be my guest. Hell, you can even write your own! Just don't come whining on the forums when nobody knows or cares what the crap you are talking about.


And there it all boils down to.
The OP is not whining, he's mere wondering what CCP is doing since they did include a Linux client since November 2008, along with a Mac client.
Now the Mac client has finally a premium client, which means less overhead for CCP, but the faith of the Linux client is for months, been far, far, from clear.

So the current client for Linux is by far perfect, is most likely not being worked on in the light of M10, and some Linux users just wonder, would like to know if there is going to be a Premium client yes or no.
Simple as that.


And to all the off topic, OS bashers and my OS is better then yours posters: please stfu.

Glengrant
Beyond Limited
Posted - 2009.02.03 14:57:00 - [119]
 

Originally by: Par'Gellen

If you think end users like us determine industry standards like Windows then you are sadly sadly mistaken.


Agreed.

Originally by: Par'Gellen

Listen, it's all about the Total Cost of Ownership. Sure Linux is free on the front end but supporting it in a large scale production environment is a rediculously expensive nightmare involving insanely overpaid consultants and/or insanely overpaid employees.


The above paragraph is true when you replace the word "Linux" with "Windows" - well except the "free on the fron end" part. :-)

Originally by: Par'Gellen
got the T-shirt (I really do lol!


:-)

Originally by: Par'Gellen
It says "I survived a migration from Linux!").


I have not doubt that there are botched Linux projects.
Just a there is quite a number of botched windows projects.

Originally by: Par'Gellen
You Linux guys can argue your chosen OS's "superiority" till you are blue in the face, and some of it may actually be true, but it doesn't change the fact that no large business with even a single IT guy with half a brain is going to choose it for the desktop OS for his people.


Real world example:
There was an article a year or so ago where the german foreign affairs department reported after a few years about their linux migration (and general open source, OO etc...). Total success. They halved their IT costs.
The migration started in 2002 - the involved open source projects (OO, Linux, etc...) have evolved a lot since then.

They had to save budget money. Needed word processing, templates, encryption and some other stuff.
The planned retraining for use of OO instead of MS Office was not even taken by most users as the switch was easy enough (typing text ain't that much different after all)

Another example:
Sun bought Star Division (<- company behind Star Office - precursor to Open Office) after calculating how much they paid annually for MS office. It was cheaper to buy Star Division and have their own office product.

Originally by: Par'Gellen
Server or niche,


You got niche wrong. It's the niches where a migration to Linux is risky. All those special inhouse applications, excel macro libs, access automation scripts, etc... that get you into trouble (though also gets problematic when upgrading to Vista and MS Office 07 - it's not all smooth sailing with MS either).

I wouldn't yet recommend Linux to my hardcore gaming friends who want to grab a box from shelf and run it right away when they get home. Linux versions are very rare and wine is hit and miss. Some work well, some with issues, some not at all. Also no point in tuning and benchmarking every last fps out of the graphics card and then paying fps for wine layer.

But for mainstream use Linux is ready *now* and has been for a while. Browsing, video, word processing - all work fine. Yes - you can't be sure that any random piece of hardware works. But Vista users found out the hard way that the same can be true for.
Typical users don't install their own OS. They buy a computer pre-installed with the OS or get a geek friend to do that.

And for supported hardware clicking trough the graphical setup of a modern Linux is no different from windows (timezone, login name, bla bla, done). Actually there is one difference - a typical desktop user is finished then - office suite and Firefox already in place (don't tell me you are using IE still - that would be crazy). Windows user then would still be jockying disks.
Also - you get a choice of languages without having to buy another license.

Also no annoying product differentiation between Basic, Home Premium, Office, Ultimate.
No WGA activation that can go wrong.

Is a regular person more likely to run into trouble with random hardware with Linux rather than Windows XP - yup.
"XP" - plenty of people had troubles with Vista installed on existing computers. In a year or so it will be the other way around. Vista and W7 will work fine with modern machines while XP doesn't get fresh drivers.

Par'Gellen
Gallente
Neon Cranium
Posted - 2009.02.03 16:13:00 - [120]
 

Originally by: Glengrant
Originally by: Par'Gellen

Listen, it's all about the Total Cost of Ownership. Sure Linux is free on the front end but supporting it in a large scale production environment is a rediculously expensive nightmare involving insanely overpaid consultants and/or insanely overpaid employees.


The above paragraph is true when you replace the word "Linux" with "Windows" - well except the "free on the fron end" part. :-)
Sorry. That just doesn't hold water with me as I've been through it personally. After migrating to Windows servers and desktops we reduced our IT staff from 14 (yes fourteen) to 3 (yes three) to support around 600 local users. We also got rid of the six-figure salary consultant that sold the big-wigs on the whole Linux idea in the first place. The only bad thing about that was that they wouldn't let me kick him in the arse as he left.

Originally by: Glengrant
I have not doubt that there are botched Linux projects. Just a there is quite a number of botched windows projects.

True. But who do you call when your Linux project is botched? Your cousin? No, more like Mr. Six-figure Consultant.
What about a botched Windows project? Practically any high school kid could fix it.

Originally by: Glengrant
Real world example:
There was an article a year or so ago where the german foreign affairs department reported after a few years about their linux migration (and general open source, OO etc...). Total success. They halved their IT costs.
The migration started in 2002 - the involved open source projects (OO, Linux, etc...) have evolved a lot since then.

They had to save budget money. Needed word processing, templates, encryption and some other stuff.
The planned retraining for use of OO instead of MS Office was not even taken by most users as the switch was easy enough (typing text ain't that much different after all)

Another example:
Sun bought Star Division (<- company behind Star Office - precursor to Open Office) after calculating how much they paid annually for MS office. It was cheaper to buy Star Division and have their own office product.
Fair enough but I see far more horror stories that go the other way. As I've already said I've had the priviledge to experience one of my own first hand.

Originally by: Glengrant
You got niche wrong. It's the niches where a migration to Linux is risky. All those special inhouse applications, excel macro libs, access automation scripts, etc... that get you into trouble (though also gets problematic when upgrading to Vista and MS Office 07 - it's not all smooth sailing with MS either).
That is exactly my point. Nothing is all smooth sailing with any OS. But if you need support with Microsoft all you have to do is open the front door and you're buried under cheap qualified people that can fix things. Linux? Not so much. This cannot be shrugged off since salaries are a major, if not the largest, part of Total Cost of Ownership of any system.

Originally by: Glengrant
don't tell me you are using IE still - that would be crazy
Every single day with no problems. How exactly is this crazy?

Originally by: Glengrant
Also no annoying product differentiation between Basic, Home Premium, Office, Ultimate.
Have you looked at the flavors of Linux lately? I get confused just trying to pronounce them.

Originally by: Glengrant
No WGA activation that can go wrong.
That only happens if you are trying to do something you shouldn't be trying to do in the first place or if you have an actual hardware issue. That isn't the fault of the OS and is so easily fixed with a simple phone call it's a non-issue.


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