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

Semkhet
Dark Tornado
Ethereal Dawn
Posted - 2009.02.04 09:23:00 - [151]
 

Edited by: Semkhet on 04/02/2009 09:24:07
Originally by: Sataya Arkoa

huh? Linux has 0.8% of the desktop and Vista has 23% of the desktop. Which one is the flop here? hmmm?

Go out and get yourself a decent gaming operating system if you want to play games ffs. Twisted Evil

Oh and on security I think you will find that Windows has less security vulnerabilities than Linux and bugs are fixed quicker.

Windows has 'fewer flaws' than Linux

"A tally of this year's security bulletins by www.vnunet.com found 43 flaws in Windows XP that had been patched, similar to Jones's estimates"

"Red Hat Enterprise Linux 4 Workstation and Ubuntu Linux topped the list with roughly 170 and 150 vulnerabilities patched respectively."

Vista has fewer first-year vulnerabilities than any modern OS


For a starter, your article about vulnerabilities is based on a "Microsoft's Security Technology Unit" report. What a surprise Laughing Second, you should start to analyze the methodology used in the documents you submit: Microsoft compared, during a given period, the number of patches they issued for Windows EXCEPTING the patched related to ALL the applications installed with their OS by DEFAULT, to ALL the patches issued by leading Linux distros for ALL THEIR DISTRIBUTION. Do you have just the slighest idea about the number of apps installed with any Linux Desktop flavor ? Third, just in India there are more programmers auditing Linux code than the whole workforce of Microsoft all divisions included, therefore when you count the number of people going over the Linux code world-wide, MS just can't achieve the same level of scrutiny on their products. Fourth, there will always be more fixed vulnerabilities for open source soft vs proprietary code, since in the latter, you only know about vulnerabilities either when these are exploited, or MS deems pertinent to release a fix. But where does this give you any objective idea about the effective number of unidentified vulnerabilities ?

Linux not good for gaming ? It could be. Ignorant sods don't know that the leading military flight simulator of the US Navy (AVET for Aircrew Virtual Environment Trainer, on the iHawk platform) is based on Linux. And mil requirements in terms of reliability, maintenance, interoperability and performance are slightly above those of a gamer hooked on a pile of PC Gamer magazines Laughing

The main reason why generic gaming on Linux is in the current state of affairs is related both to the cow-mindset of most consumers: they just eat the closest bunch of grass they bump into, and to the fact that a few Dinosaurs of the IT industry are reluctant to change their business model as long they find enough lobotomized cows to milk.

Years ago, I remember analyzing the linux & windows versions of a VoIP app written by Mr. J. Walker (founder of Autocad, the world’s largest design software company). Little to say about the *Nix version. Neat and compact. On the other hand, the windows version (ansi C & pure API calls) was hilarious. In the comments, Walker explained how messed up the whole MS architecture was and the tricks you had to apply in order to get even the simplest things to get working (like for ex. psychotic UI management where the API was unable to send close and destroy messages in the pertinent sequence to child windows when the parent form was closed, the congenital MS tendency to re-implement functions existing in the Unix world since 30 years, but appositely inversing the order of arguments just to create incompatibilities with the existing code base, and so on through the whole source code...).

Even Walt-Disney runs Photoshop under Linux since 2003 ;) But you're welcome to run bloatware, maybe your time ins't that valuable after all Laughing

Sataya Arkoa
Posted - 2009.02.04 09:24:00 - [152]
 

Edited by: Sataya Arkoa on 04/02/2009 09:24:16
Originally by: Flesh Eater

LOL you're kidding, right?
That report came from none other than Microsoft.


Yes, this report is. But the figures aren't if you actually tried to understand the report.

"A tally of this year's security bulletins by www.vnunet.com"

Sataya Arkoa
Posted - 2009.02.04 09:37:00 - [153]
 

Edited by: Sataya Arkoa on 04/02/2009 09:37:33

Wrong! The full distrubution was not included. Try again.

"Include a comparison view of Linux distribution workstation builds that exclude vulnerabilities non-default optional components as well as OpenOffice and other applications that do not have equivalents on Windows XP."

vista report

Joss Sparq
Caldari
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Posted - 2009.02.04 09:50:00 - [154]
 

Stepping back to the start of the thread for just a moment,
Originally by: Sythyss
Originally by: Armoured C
Originally by: Corwain


And Linux is mainstream nowadays.


0.81% of computer users use Linux.


so say that again


you have to factor in a lot of that is just corporate-run computers. If you're talking about people's home computers, and just casual computer users like the people here who play eve, the percentage is much higher.

Fine.

0.82% then. Wink

NightmareX
Nomads
Nulli Secunda
Posted - 2009.02.04 10:11:00 - [155]
 

Edited by: NightmareX on 04/02/2009 10:12:13
I really like Ubuntu. But when it's about gaming i'll chose Windows Web Server 2008 ANY DAYS before Linux.

It doesn't help to have around the same performance in Linux when it's way to much hassle just to get a game to work perfect.

I'll take Windows instead then. Just slap the DVD in the DVD-ROM, then press Install and then after that press Play. Easy peasyWink.

ElJoeb
Posted - 2009.02.04 10:48:00 - [156]
 

Originally by: NightmareX
Edited by: NightmareX on 04/02/2009 10:12:13
I really like Ubuntu. But when it's about gaming i'll chose Windows Web Server 2008 ANY DAYS before Linux.

It doesn't help to have around the same performance in Linux when it's way to much hassle just to get a game to work perfect.

I'll take Windows instead then. Just slap the DVD in the DVD-ROM, then press Install and then after that press Play. Easy peasyWink.


This is where I'm coming from. I did most of my horsing around in Linux and OSX but work/games are always in Windows. I remember when I was trying to get EVE to work in Wine I was copying font files and had no sound on account of some EVE-Voice "glitch". It took so much time just to sit down and enjoy the game and by the time I actually could, performance would get in the way (NVidia/ATI drivers... I'm looking at you). I remember playing HL2 and taking a 30% performance decrease and couldn't even play it in DX9. So not only did it not run well, it also looked like garbage. When I built my new computer, I put Vista 64-bit in on an "experimental" basis, expecting crap. Most games worked fine (my only problem was the demo of X3 so far...) and the performance was fantastic. Aside from installing drivers (a whole 12 minutes of my life,) it didn't really take a lot of time.

I can respect the people who **** around with Linux to get their games working but... that's time I don't have anymore.

Semkhet
Dark Tornado
Ethereal Dawn
Posted - 2009.02.04 10:52:00 - [157]
 

Edited by: Semkhet on 04/02/2009 11:21:40
Originally by: Sataya Arkoa
Edited by: Sataya Arkoa on 04/02/2009 09:37:33

Wrong! The full distrubution was not included. Try again.

"Include a comparison view of Linux distribution workstation builds that exclude vulnerabilities non-default optional components as well as OpenOffice and other applications that do not have equivalents on Windows XP."

vista report



Don't mix your Ego with the concept of issuing a pertinent opinion. A clean XP Pro SP3 install holds less than 21K files. A clean Vista Ultimate SP1 install holds less than 30K files. A clean Ubuntu Desktop 8.04 install holds over 130K files belonging to over 1100 packages, including BY DEFAULT a myriad of things you could only dream of under Windows. But even taking out OpenOffice (which is installed BY DEFAULT) would only remove 206 Mb of files spread on just 10 packages. Laughing

Anyhow, if you want to talk security, then you consult NSA's work on the matter, and not mickey mouse marketing PR. Here you have the work on Windows, and here on Linux. If you have a once of common sense, you should ask yourself why the NSA is actively developing enhanced security on Linux, FreeBSD and Solaris platforms while only publishing configuration guides for Windows...

Flesh Eater
Posted - 2009.02.04 12:35:00 - [158]
 

The steps to get Eve working on Ubuntu 8.xx is something like this:

1. sudo apt-get install mscorefonts
2. copy Arial fonts to ~/.wine/drive_c/windows/fonts
3. wine eve.exe

Wow...really hard :/
I get something like 10-20 less fps in Linux (ie 60-70 instead of 80 boohoo)

Dasalt Istgut
Posted - 2009.02.04 12:38:00 - [159]
 

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?






Because the linux userbase is so small its not worth spending money to improve it.

Dasalt Istgut
Posted - 2009.02.04 12:42:00 - [160]
 

Originally by: Corwain
Edited by: Corwain on 02/02/2009 19:20:09
Originally by: WarlockX
Edited by: WarlockX on 02/02/2009 19:07:34
If anything linux should support directx. not CCP support linux.


Linux can't support DirectX due to Copyright issues. Microsoft isn't just gonna go "sure you can integrate out graphics framework into your operating system. I mean it's not like you're currently our most serious competitor."

I've played plenty of Linux games with great graphics and you have no idea how easy it is to get programs for Linux. Imagine if Windows Update didn't just update your operating system but actually allowed you to update any one of your programs and search a database of all kinds of programs. Oh, and didn't rely on a web browser.

apt-get and its frontends > GOD.

And Linux is mainstream nowadays.


Not a copyright issue. Just wouldn't work. How would you even do it in a way that isn't a hack given they have completely separate driver models and the kernel is different?

Kale Kold
Mindless Griefing
Posted - 2009.02.04 12:45:00 - [161]
 

I like it when people say Linux is not mainstream especially arguing from a mindset that the US and UK are the only place in the world that matters. I think you will find Linux and all other OSS is enjoying tremendous take up in many other countries. Just because Windows is used by more people at the minute doesn't mean that won't or isn't changing.

Personally i would of switched to Linux if the EVE client didn't suck as hard as it does now.

Flesh Eater
Posted - 2009.02.04 12:45:00 - [162]
 

Originally by: Dasalt Istgut

Because the linux userbase is so small its not worth spending money to improve it.


Thing is, this is just the type of game that would attract the type of people who use Linux.

I've worked on an international (kiosk type) graphics display application which ran in Linux and Windows. We just had a class called "Platform" and two subclasses, "linux" and "windows". This, and careful choice of libraries meant it was trivial to provide cross-platform support, and that was written in C++ - Python it would be even easier.

Dasalt Istgut
Posted - 2009.02.04 12:58:00 - [163]
 

Originally by: Feilamya

The only reason I can imagine why anyone would prefer Direct3D over OpenGL is that it might have the newest features earlier than OpenGL. But that might be wrong; is actually very likely wrong, because OpenGL is an extendable API whereas Direct3D is not. If there is a new hardware feature, hardware vendors can define a new OpenGL extension to make the feature available in OpenGL. Direct3D, on the other hand, can only be extended by Microsoft.

...

So whatever the reason was for CCP to use Direct3D, it was most certainly not laziness. If it had been laziness or convenience, EVE would be using OpenGL.



Reason why companies choose DirectX over OpenGL is pretty simple. If you're an organization that is about to spend seven figures developing an application and you have to justify your architecture, on a risk management perspective are you going to put all your cards in with OpenGL or DirectX? Basically are you going to align yourself with the Khronos Group or are you going to align yourself with Microsoft?

Say what you want about Microsoft but I don't think there's any risk of it disappearing tomorrow. You're also guaranteed it will be continually improved and updated. Welcome to how the corporate world thinks. The threat that a new version of Windows comes out potentially breaking OpenGL and requiring a rewrite is risk enough to prefer sticking with a DirectX stack unless there's something you can get out of OpenGL that you can't get out of DirectX (there isn't really).

ElJoeb
Posted - 2009.02.04 12:58:00 - [164]
 

Originally by: Flesh Eater
The steps to get Eve working on Ubuntu 8.xx is something like this:

1. sudo apt-get install mscorefonts
2. copy Arial fonts to ~/.wine/drive_c/windows/fonts
3. wine eve.exe

Wow...really hard :/
I get something like 10-20 less fps in Linux (ie 60-70 instead of 80 boohoo)



I said way back when, not now. Learning to read is hard for some people, but come on. Ubuntu didn't always do so much to hold your hand back then. plus there was that business of not using Ubuntu... Plus decreased performance means a bit more when you can't even get 50 fps in Windows...

Dasalt Istgut
Posted - 2009.02.04 13:05:00 - [165]
 

Originally by: Flesh Eater
Originally by: Dasalt Istgut

Because the linux userbase is so small its not worth spending money to improve it.


Thing is, this is just the type of game that would attract the type of people who use Linux.

I've worked on an international (kiosk type) graphics display application which ran in Linux and Windows. We just had a class called "Platform" and two subclasses, "linux" and "windows". This, and careful choice of libraries meant it was trivial to provide cross-platform support, and that was written in C++ - Python it would be even easier.


To be honest I think Linux on an OS level is superior. There are things about the way it works (sandbox security model, apt, etc) that are just brilliant and Windows would be 1000x better if they adopted a similar approach. That being said its a very hard sell even in a server environment depending on what type of software you're developing. There's a lot of risk associated with open source and associated with Linux in general. As an example, when you start talking about middleware packages, industry-specific hardware, etc you need to mitigate risks associated with vendor support. In simpler terms - most things that work on Linux can be made to work on Windows but the reverse isn't true so it is almost always an easier sell to use Windows.

Angry Cheeto
Posted - 2009.02.04 13:23:00 - [166]
 

Originally by: Flesh Eater
...you develop using microsoft's tools and libraries...
you say that like it's a bad thing. I LOL'd. you can't seriously be saying that visual studio is bad. If so then wow..... just wow. Plese come back when you are in touch with reality haha!Rolling Eyes oh and welcome to Earth!

Dasalt Istgut
Posted - 2009.02.04 13:27:00 - [167]
 

Originally by: Flesh Eater
and that was written in C++ - Python it would be even easier.


Thing is, Python isn't used for the nuts and bolts of the graphics engine. That part is written in C++ and directly wraps DirectX. The real costs of cross-platform support don't just end at the development costs either - you need to consider support (help desk) costs, quality assurance costs, etc. At some point or another you're spending more money than you're taking in. Linux's problems have never been technical, they've always been legal and business oriented. It's a shame but it is what it is.

Semkhet
Dark Tornado
Ethereal Dawn
Posted - 2009.02.04 13:28:00 - [168]
 

Originally by: Dasalt Istgut
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?






Because the linux GAMER userbase is so small its not worth spending money to improve it.


Fixed for you. Red Hat has over 2.5 million paying subscribers (you can imagine by yourself how many more are using it without support...). Fedora 9 got uploaded by at least 1.2 million unique IP's, and Canonical believes that Ubuntu's user base has reached 8 million while it's Community Forums holds 600K registered members. You should stop looking at your belly botton believing it's the center of the world. The number of linux users in India, China, Brazil and Russia has little to do with the numbers of Linux users in the US or EU.

Most of the statistics are purely based on data gathered through internet, what obviously presupposes the access to a connection which is still prohibitive in the two most populated countries on earth: China & India. In short, in relation to the amount of people which effectively uses a given OS, a chinese school with 2000 kids and 50 linux computers wired to the internet while gives a lower statistical impact than 200 europeans surfing daily with their XP machines. But at the end it's still 2000 chinese becoming proficient with Linux who can't be counted with a methodology depending entirely on statistics gathered through connectivity Wink. It's a bit like cars. In the EU and US, there's statistically just slightly more than one individual per driving car, while in emergent countries the number is much higher.

Flesh Eater
Posted - 2009.02.04 13:36:00 - [169]
 

Originally by: Angry Cheeto
Originally by: Flesh Eater
...you develop using microsoft's tools and libraries...
you say that like it's a bad thing. I LOL'd. you can't seriously be saying that visual studio is bad. If so then wow..... just wow. Plese come back when you are in touch with reality haha!Rolling Eyes oh and welcome to Earth!


Huh?

I use them at work too quite a bit, and I like Visual Studio. WTF you are talking about?

Dasalt Istgut
Posted - 2009.02.04 13:44:00 - [170]
 

Edited by: Dasalt Istgut on 04/02/2009 13:51:33
Edited by: Dasalt Istgut on 04/02/2009 13:43:57
Originally by: Semkhet

Fixed for you. Red Hat has over 2.5 million paying subscribers (you can imagine by yourself how many more are using it without support...). Fedora 9 got uploaded by at least 1.2 million unique IP's, and Canonical believes that Ubuntu's user base has reached 8 million while it's Community Forums holds 600K registered members. You should stop looking at your belly botton believing it's the center of the world. The number of linux users in India, China, Brazil and Russia has little to do with the numbers of Linux users in the US or EU.



I'm not looking at my 'belly bottom' (wtf?). I'm stating the simple truth. The 'gamer' userbase bit was implied given we're talking about a computer game. Its also implicit that I'm referring to a userbase that CCP by default has to support either way. Like or dislike CCP's business strategy it has been a successful. The motivations that drive people to shy away from developing cross-platform games are compelling and rational (edited to add: assuming its your capital/money riding on the decision).

That being said none of this has to do with technical limitations but cost and risk management. Maybe you feel like you're on a level where you want to take a company that pulls in millions of dollars a year and question them on their business strategy but I understand their logic and don't really feel like I have any position to debate it with them.

Semkhet
Dark Tornado
Ethereal Dawn
Posted - 2009.02.04 13:51:00 - [171]
 

Edited by: Semkhet on 04/02/2009 14:03:59
Originally by: Dasalt Istgut
Originally by: Flesh Eater
Originally by: Dasalt Istgut

Because the linux userbase is so small its not worth spending money to improve it.


Thing is, this is just the type of game that would attract the type of people who use Linux.

I've worked on an international (kiosk type) graphics display application which ran in Linux and Windows. We just had a class called "Platform" and two subclasses, "linux" and "windows". This, and careful choice of libraries meant it was trivial to provide cross-platform support, and that was written in C++ - Python it would be even easier.


To be honest I think Linux on an OS level is superior. There are things about the way it works (sandbox security model, apt, etc) that are just brilliant and Windows would be 1000x better if they adopted a similar approach. That being said its a very hard sell even in a server environment depending on what type of software you're developing. There's a lot of risk associated with open source and associated with Linux in general. As an example, when you start talking about middleware packages, industry-specific hardware, etc you need to mitigate risks associated with vendor support. In simpler terms - most things that work on Linux can be made to work on Windows but the reverse isn't true so it is almost always an easier sell to use Windows.


Depends of the specifics of the industry you work with. Try to put 64 VM's with WAMP's on a good machine with 4 Gb RAM on any flavor of Windows and get back to me. Then take a good Linux server distro, install OpenVZ, and you actually have you 64 LAMP's working. Does wonders for cheap hosting of low load sites in countries where you can't rely on Cobalt racks. Did I forget to say that OpenVZ even supports real-time migration of the virtual machines ? Wink There are tons of examples like this one. But the difference is that these aren't point-and-click solutions, and it seems that with time, we westerners are increasingly becoming lazy...

You are worried about security & costs ? LOL. It's exactly by reaching the inverse conclusions that the U.S Department of Defense has singled out open source in the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2009 (H.R. 5658). And with all due respect, they probably use a set of metrics slightly broader and more stringent than yours and mine...

Dasalt Istgut
Posted - 2009.02.04 14:06:00 - [172]
 

Originally by: Semkhet

Depends of the specifics of the industry you work with.


Yeah, I stated that in my post.

Originally by: Semkhet

Try to put 64 VM's with WAMP's on a good machine with 4 Gb RAM on any flavor of Windows and get back to me. Then take a good Linux server distro, install OpenVZ, and you actually have you 64 LAMP's working. Does wonders for cheap hosting of low load sites in countries where you can't rely on Cobalt racks. Did I forget to say that OpenVZ even supports real-time migration of the virtual machines ? Wink There are tons of examples like this one. But the difference is that these aren't point-and-click solutions, and it seems that with time, we westerners are increasingly becoming lazy...



Having gone through the process of justifying a VM stack to a client recently the argument I ran into regarding OpenVZ versus VMWare/Xen is that OpenVZ has limited marketshare, administration resources are more limited, its not common criteria certified, etc. There's also the whole issue of "what if this project went stale tomorrow." Its not an issue of laziness - its that the commercial licensing costs of using say, Citrix XenServer are negligible compared to the risks associated with going with something like OpenVZ.

Originally by: Semkhet

You are worried about security & costs ? LOL. It's exactly by reaching the inverse conclusions that U.S Department of Defense has singled out open source in the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2009 (H.R. 5658). And with all due respect, they probably use a set of metrics slightly broader and more stringent than yours...


Heh, actually projects in the federal space are what I usually work with. If you've ever worked with a project in the federal space you'll understand things like 'approved software lists' and certified software. Is MySQL bad? No, but without common criteria certification you're left with MS SQL, DB2, Oracle as the holy trinity (this is just giving you an example). Of those on a cost basis which are you going to go with? Do you want to pay per VPU or CPU knowing there's literally $100,000's difference between A & B in a multi-server/multi-location setup and 'free' just isn't an option because you'll be in violation of your contract?

All of that aside it its a bit off topic but yeah. Depending on the demands of your particular project and the budget involved and the level of compliance you need to operate under there's going to be things you can do and things you can't do. Point being these concerns are not really technical in nature or 'lazy', it has to do with business strategy, risk mitigation, budgeting strategy, etc. When you start talking about any multi-million dollar software effort those things surface a lot more often than the technical differences between two pieces of software.

Semkhet
Dark Tornado
Ethereal Dawn
Posted - 2009.02.04 15:22:00 - [173]
 

Originally by: Dasalt Istgut

Having gone through the process of justifying a VM stack to a client recently the argument I ran into regarding OpenVZ versus VMWare/Xen is that OpenVZ has limited marketshare, administration resources are more limited, its not common criteria certified, etc. There's also the whole issue of "what if this project went stale tomorrow." Its not an issue of laziness - its that the commercial licensing costs of using say, Citrix XenServer are negligible compared to the risks associated with going with something like OpenVZ.


There are barely risks when outsourcing costs pennies should any functionality miss or the original team abort development (and we are not talking about an experimental product here), specially when you can audit every single line of code. A russian PhD barely makes a few hundred $/month nowadays... After testing virtualization systems, I opted for OpenVZ for pure Linux stuff, and Sun xVM for the rest. IMHO apart the small resources footprint, one of the things I like the most about OpenVZ is mass management. Try to upgrade N VM's under competing systems in a single go: as far as I know you can't. In OpenVZ you just need to operate from the hardware node and that's it, and this is a real advantage as soon you're maintaining a lot of VM's or complex virtual clusters since you just need to setup all the HW nodes the same way in order to automate the whole process over as many machines you wish, virtual or not.

Originally by: Dasalt Istgut

Heh, actually projects in the federal space are what I usually work with. If you've ever worked with a project in the federal space you'll understand things like 'approved software lists' and certified software. Is MySQL bad? No, but without common criteria certification you're left with MS SQL, DB2, Oracle as the holy trinity (this is just giving you an example). Of those on a cost basis which are you going to go with? Do you want to pay per VPU or CPU knowing there's literally $100,000's difference between A & B in a multi-server/multi-location setup and 'free' just isn't an option because you'll be in violation of your contract?
.

Agreed. However the landscape is richer than what the commercial IT gorillas want the public to know. IIRC, Red Hat Enterprise Linux achieved the DISA COE already in 2003 to give an example. Besides, budgetary constraints vary not only according to local, political, strategic or technical criteria, but also according to economic conjuncture. Let see if nowadays you can go in California for ex, and implement a project the classic way with license fees and all the sheebang when there are cheaper alternatives getting the job equally done, certs or not. When there's not enough $ there's not enough $, as simple as that, but state services must still be provided. This is also why so many countries are massively switching to FOSS through government-issued directives (Brazil, India, Russia, etc...).

Mes Ren
No Trademark
Posted - 2009.02.04 15:50:00 - [174]
 

Originally by: Sataya Arkoa
Edited by: Sataya Arkoa on 04/02/2009 08:55:44

Originally by: Glengrant
Originally by: WarlockX

you don't need third party anything, have you even tried vista?



Vista is pathetic.

No wonder it flopped.


huh? Linux has 0.8% of the desktop and Vista has 23% of the desktop. Which one is the flop here? hmmm?

Go out and get yourself a decent gaming operating system if you want to play games ffs. Twisted Evil

Oh and on security I think you will find that Windows has less security vulnerabilities than Linux and bugs are fixed quicker.

Windows has 'fewer flaws' than Linux

"A tally of this year's security bulletins by www.vnunet.com found 43 flaws in Windows XP that had been patched, similar to Jones's estimates"

"Red Hat Enterprise Linux 4 Workstation and Ubuntu Linux topped the list with roughly 170 and 150 vulnerabilities patched respectively."

Vista has fewer first-year vulnerabilities than any modern OS


Wow, did you actually read that article? "The report also does not mention vulnerabilities that were or are currently being actively exploited, an area where Microsoft continues to be far more prone than its competitors."

In addition, the report was created by microsoft, and you will notice that they refer to any patches for other OS's as "vulnerabilities" which in reality are updates -- since these are constantly progressing OS's, and refer to the patches for MS as "fixes", which are in fact the few security vulnerabilities they actually fix (according to the same article).

Dasalt Istgut
Posted - 2009.02.04 16:07:00 - [175]
 

Originally by: Semkhet
IIRC, Red Hat Enterprise Linux achieved the DISA COE already in 2003 to give an example.


Yep, so has SUSE. Now you need to find the rest of your software and hardware. Its annoying but it is the way it is.

Sevarus James
Minmatar
Meridian Dynamics
Posted - 2009.02.04 23:43:00 - [176]
 

Funny how the arguments in this thread sidetrack the real issue.

1.
CCP has OFFICIAL SUPPORT listed for linux. Check the clients section. Its there.

2. CCP doesn't have DEDICATED support in house. They farmed that support to Transgaming.
TRANSGAMING is the central point for building and maintaining the linux client. If CCP has personnel assigned its NOT in a developer position, at least the last time I talked with QA devs who dealt with the client.

3. CCP has been 100% SILENT on these boards and below in the OFFICIAL LINUX SECTION regarding this MAC only announcement.

The conclusions drawn here are pretty simple. They 'technically' support the client, but in their silence, they are moving away from it.

THIS isn't as big a deal anymore. WINE runs premium VERY VERY well, and has a faster development cycle with better support than transgaming is capable of giving. TG is supporting CIDER and thus the coming mac premium client.

Shrugs. TG has always talked 'big', but the proof is in the product, not the marketing.

Use whatever operating system you want. Its a free world. I choose Linux BECAUSE of the freedom it gives me.

Oh, and a few pages back there was a discussion about what Vista can do compared to linux as far as customization. The link I provide shows something Vista can only dream of doing.
Shrugs.


C'Ristine Chapill
Posted - 2009.02.05 01:17:00 - [177]
 

I remember back in the day there were conversations like this on USENET. They were argumentative and heated as hell. The difference today is that (except for about three people), none of you have any idea what you are talking about.

Oh how I weep over trading Archie and Veronica for what is now politely called "Teh Intern3tz". I suppose it's the same weeping Einstein did when e=mc2 produced a bomb.

Better watch out though. Some physicist is going to invent a method for time travel- the first thing he's going to do is go back in time to blow up ARPAnet.

He or she will be my hero.

Either get lives or get information. But for the love of god stop posting!

Angry Cheeto
Posted - 2009.02.12 13:24:00 - [178]
 

Originally by: CCP
(Paraphrased) Linux support costs us more money than it makes. It would be stupid for us to continue wasting our time on it.
http://myeve.eve-online.com/devblog.asp?a=blog&bid=625

THANK [email protected] It's about stinkin time they woke up and smelled the money going down the toilet

Adel Sorra
Posted - 2009.02.12 19:26:00 - [179]
 

Originally by: Sataya Arkoa
Windows has 'fewer flaws' than Linux

"A tally of this year's security bulletins by www.vnunet.com found 43 flaws in Windows XP that had been patched, similar to Jones's estimates"

"Red Hat Enterprise Linux 4 Workstation and Ubuntu Linux topped the list with roughly 170 and 150 vulnerabilities patched respectively."

did you read the whole article??
Quote:
The study only takes into account vulnerabilities patched by the vendor, and does not record such things as current zero-day flaws.

The report also does not mention vulnerabilities that were or are currently being actively exploited, an area where Microsoft continues to be far more prone than its competitors.

having less patches doesn't mean **** if you just dont fix anything..

Kalintos Tyl
Minmatar
Bloody Amarr's
Posted - 2009.02.12 19:44:00 - [180]
 

better ask how many werent fixed


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