Verno wrote on Oct 31, 2012, 09:01:
I don't think a package manager for free software is really comparable to people installing commercial software on the Windows platform. People would expect every dumb little "app" on the planet to have a Linux version. Besides, the Linux experience for your average user breaks down when they need to dig deeper than the surface. They have enough problems on Windows as it is.
Verno wrote on Oct 30, 2012, 14:30:
large company like Valve is willing to put their weight behind it but there is a lot that needs to be done, the lack of a unifying API like DirectX is particularly troublesome when it comes to games adoption on Linux despite the Win32 emulation advances.
LC wrote on Oct 30, 2012, 16:13:
I've tried Ubuntu, Mint(Ubuntu), Sabayon(Gentoo) and the Mandrivia forks PCLinuxOS and Mageia 2. All these have a user friendly GUI package manager plus something like Synaptic and finally you have the terminal. Packages are broken down by category and you can search by keyword. When you select a package it automatically downloads and installs the package and any required dependencies. Installed packages are also removed through the Software Manager. I don't really see how it could be made any easier.
InBlack wrote on Oct 30, 2012, 05:42:
Because if EA, Activision and a few other big name publishers continue to develop games exclusively for Windows (read DirectX) Valve is fucked no matter how hard they try to support Linux.
Right but the problems usually begin when a user wants to install "boxed" software. Package managers and whatnot are arcane voodoo to those people, the ones who want to run office, an antivirus application and get lolcat screensavers or whatever. I guess my point is that getting booted to a user friendly desktop is only half the battle. The kind of people who just want to game on Steam aren't necessarily all power users, far from it. I play Counter-Strike and other FPS games quite a bit with public communities, I am amazed most of the people I encounter actually managed to get themselves in game. Hell, back before UPNP and other advances many couldn't.I've tried Ubuntu, Mint(Ubuntu), Sabayon(Gentoo) and the Mandrivia forks PCLinuxOS and Mageia 2. All these have a user friendly GUI package manager plus something like Synaptic and finally you have the terminal. Packages are broken down by category and you can search by keyword. When you select a package it automatically downloads and installs the package and any required dependencies. Installed packages are also removed through the Software Manager. I don't really see how it could be made any easier.
The PC market has a deceptive amount of casual users and those people need their OS preinstalled, I'm not sure if Linux has made any traction there recently but last I heard things weren't good.
I think it's promising that a large company like Valve is willing to put their weight behind it but there is a lot that needs to be done, the lack of a unifying API like DirectX is particularly troublesome when it comes to games adoption on Linux despite the Win32 emulation advances.
Kitkoan wrote on Oct 30, 2012, 00:43:
Reading this gave me the belief that the BSD that it was similar enough to merit my statement.
Wikidd wrote on Oct 30, 2012, 13:00:Kitkoan wrote on Oct 30, 2012, 00:43:
As I said, last I knew, not it is this. From what I read it was, this is why Darwin code its available but why it can't be compiled into a working OS because only what its needed to be open sourced is.
Now, instead of acting like a little bitch, could you stop swearing at me and explain the differences and why Darwin is open sourced but not complete? Or do you have no idea? I took a quick look at the BSD license before my last response and from what I read, it works pretty much the same as GPL.
You deserve to get heat for not even bothering to look on Wikipedia.
You can compile the Darwin code to a working OS, but that OS is not MacOS. It's the plumbing that's underneath MacOS. Any POSIX compliant code should compile and run on the Darwin that Apple releases. As the code has a BSD heritage, Apple is under no obligation to release the code. That's why they've relicensed it as Apple Public Source License, which is a FSF approved but GPL incompatible license.
By saying you think the BSD and GPL licenses are similar, it sounds like you're trolling. The BSD says "here's the code, do whatever you want with it" whereas the GPL says "here's the code, if you distribute modifications you must also distribute the source code for those modifications".
Two variants of the license, the New BSD License/Modified BSD License,[1] and the Simplified BSD License/FreeBSD License[2] have been verified as GPL-compatible free software licenses by the Free Software Foundation, and have been vetted as open source licenses by the Open Source Initiative
LC wrote on Oct 30, 2012, 14:03:
Judging from the negative Linux comments most of you folks haven't tried it in awhile or not at all. I've used Windows for the last 13-14 years and found the transition very, very easy. A lot of the distros run 'out of the box'. Download a live CD and try it out, just keep in mind it'll most likely be a little sluggish running off CD or USB stick.
Right now I'm using Mint 13 with the Mate desktop. Added the Gion icon set and Win2K Borders and have mine looking about like Win2K Pro. For good or bad the desktop background is my doing so don't blame the Mint folks for that.
[IMG]http://thumbnails105.imagebam.com/21775/826690217744023.jpg[/IMG] [IMG]http://thumbnails106.imagebam.com/21775/93bf70217744029.jpg[/IMG]
Kitkoan wrote on Oct 30, 2012, 00:43:
As I said, last I knew, not it is this. From what I read it was, this is why Darwin code its available but why it can't be compiled into a working OS because only what its needed to be open sourced is.
Now, instead of acting like a little bitch, could you stop swearing at me and explain the differences and why Darwin is open sourced but not complete? Or do you have no idea? I took a quick look at the BSD license before my last response and from what I read, it works pretty much the same as GPL.
NetHead wrote on Oct 30, 2012, 10:12:headkase wrote on Oct 30, 2012, 03:02:
Really. Check out my desktop:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VOE6fUQTjqs
I made that video, that's my voice, get a clue.
Sorry but those are the most useless features I've even seen being showed off, for anything not just Linux. I watched it twice just to make sure. All that shows is useless gimmicky features are being added instead of sensible usability.
In fact it's worse than that if anything, since you yourself in it state recording while simply using the OS slows things down.
Wow, impressive.
Oh and I just have to add, the video wraps around the cube? That's such a great feature, I'm going to watch all my videos like that from now on.
Oh my god.
http://i.imgur.com/PcUd3.jpg
Kitkoan wrote on Oct 30, 2012, 11:42:Wintermute wrote on Oct 30, 2012, 07:24:Kitkoan wrote on Oct 30, 2012, 00:43:You've been told that you are wrong and yet you insist on pulling facts out ass?
Last I knew, the BSD is GPL.
The GPL is not the same as the BSD, and that is why Apple went with the BSD one. It suited them better.
As I said, last I knew, not it is this. From what I read it was, this is why Darwin code its available but why it can't be compiled into a working OS because only what its needed to be open sourced is.
Now, instead of acting like a little bitch, could you stop swearing at me and explain the differences and why Darwin is open sourced but not complete? Or do you have no idea? I took a quick look at the BSD license before my last response and from what I read, it works pretty much the same as GPL.
Wintermute wrote on Oct 30, 2012, 07:24:Kitkoan wrote on Oct 30, 2012, 00:43:You've been told that you are wrong and yet you insist on pulling facts out ass?
Last I knew, the BSD is GPL.
The GPL is not the same as the BSD, and that is why Apple went with the BSD one. It suited them better.
headkase wrote on Oct 30, 2012, 03:02:
Really. Check out my desktop:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VOE6fUQTjqs
I made that video, that's my voice, get a clue.