I completely agree with this sentiment. People who are incapable of using GNU/Linux as a desktop OS are so primarily because of ignorance. These are the same people who always get malware on their Windows PCs which I have to clean for them just to make their PCs usable again. It's a wonder things like on-line banking are even legal. These people shouldn't be using any home PCs at all regardless of whether they're Windows or GNU/Linux based.
GNU/Linux is just as easy to set up and use as a decent Windows install these days. Debian "Jessie"/KDE runs great on my new this year ASUS laptop using a new this year i5 Broadwell architecture that came with Windows 8.1 pre-installed with a bit of bloatware. Sure, I had to backport the Intel 5500 HD Graphics drivers to get the graphics acceleration working, but that was the most complicated thing. Everything else works great including Wi-Fi, webcam, SD card reader, DVD burner, HDMI audio/video out, and so on. I did do some additional optimization tweaks for my 1TB Samsung 850 EVO SSD I installed in the laptop, but it works fine without doing those.
"The year of the Linux desktop" is kind of a ridiculous statement in my opinion. More like: "The consecutive years Microsoft angered a significant enough portion of its user base to drive them into looking at alternatives to find out Linux is already a largely viable option." The only thing holding GNU/Linux back is not having the same kind of widespread hardware/software compatibility and support for the ease of use for some people.
The "grandma" is never going to install GNU/Linux just as she is never going to install Windows. She just gets a new computer every few years because she messed up her last one with malware.
Microsoft shot themselves in the foot by messing with the "grandma's" user interface with Windows 8 and now they're turning Windows into intrusive adware with Windows 10. No wonder they're giving it away free. The "customers" are the product that they're selling now that they're a "service" company!
Keep in mind that this is coming from someone who actually has a fair amount of respect for Microsoft and the OSs that they've made in the past. If you know how to properly set up and maintain them they can be very useful. I'm going to be using Windows 7 as the main OS on my "super computer" (see my sig.) for the long haul. Even so, I use GNU/Linux on virtual machines I run on it too.
What this all boils down to is that GNU/Linux is definitely going to be increasingly rising in popularity on the desktop OS environment, starting out first with us geeks (not to be confused with the fake hipster geeks that use Apple OS) and modders who will then spread it to everyone else because we're the ones that keep their computers up and running, not trying to sell them a new one that they don't need.
Last edited:
Nope, not really. Android is so cut-back, that it hasn't to do much with Linux or a Desktop OS. Most tools and control methods are lacking, you cannot work with it like you work with a regular OS. Plus, it is slow and unstable. It can't even compete on mobiles in technical terms with more superior plattforms like QNX.
For the end user, Linux on the Desktop is like OSX, with better hardware support and a (often worse) choice of window managers. But most of the basics are the same, except for the ways to control daemons. Android is far from reaching that level of maturity, and Windows behaves completely different.
Last edited:
Perhaps contact the magazine ?
I think the driver issues cant be angled at Linux anymore seeing as windows10 wont even let end users try to install without loads of faffing around and even then only temporary. If the driver isnt WDDM it aint liking it.
For me as soon as Vista gets retired im going Linux Mint or Ubuntu win10 aint worth the hassle.
If ED dont have a nix version I will just wait till it does (if ever) or look to get a mac mini
For me as soon as Vista gets retired im going Linux Mint or Ubuntu win10 aint worth the hassle.
If ED dont have a nix version I will just wait till it does (if ever) or look to get a mac mini
Get back to focusing on making it work now!
Commanders,
Lets focus on the goal. Rhetoric aside, I actually want to play my shiny new copy of ED on my Ubuntu system. For better or worse, this means Wine. I think a well documented Wine/Crossover/Play on Linux is a good compromise for us to ask Frontier to aim for.
We could start with some exact details for the preferred runtime environment for the startup tool. It should be the easiest part. Presumably the .net runtime under Apple is the same as the ones available natively on Linux?
Urgent Message ends.
FWIW, I've loved Elite since the BBC/Spectrum days, which is why i bought a physical copy of ED. I need it to run under Linux if I'm *ever* going to get to actually play it. I've worked (in the literal sense) in the past with getting games running under Wine, and i don't see any problems here that cannot be sorted out by a concerted effort on us Linux users doing the Wine part, and an understanding Frontier tweaking their builds to ease the pain. I normally I boot to windows once every 3 months to keep it patched (while removing any MS 'Enhanced Customer Service experience' spyware updates from the update list), ED might up that to once a month.... Frontier, can you help a fella out?
Commanders,
Lets focus on the goal. Rhetoric aside, I actually want to play my shiny new copy of ED on my Ubuntu system. For better or worse, this means Wine. I think a well documented Wine/Crossover/Play on Linux is a good compromise for us to ask Frontier to aim for.
We could start with some exact details for the preferred runtime environment for the startup tool. It should be the easiest part. Presumably the .net runtime under Apple is the same as the ones available natively on Linux?
Urgent Message ends.
FWIW, I've loved Elite since the BBC/Spectrum days, which is why i bought a physical copy of ED. I need it to run under Linux if I'm *ever* going to get to actually play it. I've worked (in the literal sense) in the past with getting games running under Wine, and i don't see any problems here that cannot be sorted out by a concerted effort on us Linux users doing the Wine part, and an understanding Frontier tweaking their builds to ease the pain. I normally I boot to windows once every 3 months to keep it patched (while removing any MS 'Enhanced Customer Service experience' spyware updates from the update list), ED might up that to once a month.... Frontier, can you help a fella out?
Not quite true, and I'm not going to jump into the micro-kernel (QNX) mono-kernel(Linux) debate, because its not relevant here.
A game like ED generally runs on top of the kernel interfaces, not the Android "window manager/OS" that runs on top of the Linux kernel, (unless the game was written in Java like minecraft
). It either interfaces directly with the kernel, or through a direct to kernel abstraction layer like SDL or OpenGL. In principle, whether its Android or KDE, it does not matter. The window manager generally gets out of the way, or is pushed into the background as the native application takes over the screen. I think the biggest difficulty with an Android port (common abstractions like OpenGL and SDL being available already), is dealing with the overhead of building and testing ED in a predominantly non x86 processor architecture ecosystem.
Not quite true, and I'm not going to jump into the micro-kernel (QNX) mono-kernel(Linux) debate, because its not relevant here.
A game like ED generally runs on top of the kernel interfaces, not the Android "window manager/OS" that runs on top of the Linux kernel, (unless the game was written in Java like minecraft
It either interfaces directly with the kernel, or through a direct to kernel abstraction layer like SDL or OpenGL. In principle, whether its Android or KDE, it does not matter. The window manager generally gets out of the way, or is pushed into the background as the native application takes over the screen. I think the biggest difficulty with an Android port (common abstractions like OpenGL and SDL being available already), is dealing with the overhead of building and testing ED in a predominantly non x86 processor architecture ecosystem.
Only problem with Android is that majority of Android devices support something between OpenGL ES 3 - 3.2. With Horizons going after full blown compute shaders that's not enough.
The problem remains that the android kernel and the base os are missing a lot of features, from LVM to swap. Same goes for the Android GUI, nobody would want to have such a thing on a Desktop.
Compiling for other architectures is not a big deal, it has been done by David Braben for Elite and Frontier and is quite common in the industry. However, issues do exist because the GPU drivers are usually binary and compiled for x86 only, while the open source versions aren't nearly as stable and potent (e.g. nouveau).
Issues in Android include random crashes without dumps (especially when programs are put in the background) and inability to access devices etc. when compiled as a Dalvik thingy instead of native.
For phones, QNX/BB10 is far superior. For example, the real time nature let's me answer incoming phone calls even if my phone is busy with something else (like rendering a web page), because it can preempt. And the Dalvik apps are just painfully slow, it's amazing how fast everything runs on cheap windows phones in comparison.
Plus, the usual UI problems, such as displaying a softkeyboard when the phone has a hardware one, tilting the apps by 90 degrees, displaying them sideways (usually app dev's fault) ...
Seriously, Android is a train wreck. I was pumped for it, hoping it would surpass Maemo and bring Linux with phone hardware integration and customized UI to the smartphones. Boy was I wrong..
I think I didn't make my point clearly enough. That was my fault, as I was typing with four or so kids running around the room screaming at each other.
The point I was making was not that FD should make an Android client. I was making the point that a popular desktop build of "Android on a suitably powerful machine with the right OpenGL libraries installed is a lot closer than the year of the Linux desktop, imo." It's not a prime-time gaming OS. Nvidia are pushing Android and Valve are pushing SteamOS - a dedicated gaming platform built on Linux. Neither are desktop Linux distros, which is the resoning behind my "year of the Linux desktop" comment. FWIW, I prefer Linux as a desktop operating system (and I like Unity. Shoot me.) The problem is that most people just don't care enough about their operating system to bother trying others. It might as well be a magic box with a litte homunculus inside doing all the work for what most people care.
It's an educational problem rather than a marketing or awareness problem. IT education in Western nations is seriously lacking in depth. Indeed, in the UK, it's largely (though not exclusively) an instrumental endeavour of teaching young people how to use common applications, rather than getting them into coding and a deeper understanding of how software works.
So, should FD make a Linux client? From my perspective, yes. I'd even buy it again to support its development - I'd be able to drop Windows completely then. Will FD make a Linux client? I don't know. It depends on how well SteamOS takes off.
The point I was making was not that FD should make an Android client. I was making the point that a popular desktop build of "Android on a suitably powerful machine with the right OpenGL libraries installed is a lot closer than the year of the Linux desktop, imo." It's not a prime-time gaming OS. Nvidia are pushing Android and Valve are pushing SteamOS - a dedicated gaming platform built on Linux. Neither are desktop Linux distros, which is the resoning behind my "year of the Linux desktop" comment. FWIW, I prefer Linux as a desktop operating system (and I like Unity. Shoot me.) The problem is that most people just don't care enough about their operating system to bother trying others. It might as well be a magic box with a litte homunculus inside doing all the work for what most people care.
It's an educational problem rather than a marketing or awareness problem. IT education in Western nations is seriously lacking in depth. Indeed, in the UK, it's largely (though not exclusively) an instrumental endeavour of teaching young people how to use common applications, rather than getting them into coding and a deeper understanding of how software works.
So, should FD make a Linux client? From my perspective, yes. I'd even buy it again to support its development - I'd be able to drop Windows completely then. Will FD make a Linux client? I don't know. It depends on how well SteamOS takes off.
Marketing is an excersize in education and awarenesss.. neither of which a proJECT like Liinux has. Which is why even when people HAVE heard about it, they usually don't know anything/enough about out.
Whereas a proDUCT is something which gets marketed, spreading education and awareness about the proDUCTs, and therefore fostering familiarity.
Now, you can certainly proDUCTize a proJECT like linux, which Canonical has (ubuntu) and RedHat has (RHEL/Fedora), but alas, those compaines are operating at a bit of a disadvantage.
Nevertheless, awareness of Linux has grown despite its decentralized nature, and education about linux is slowly growing as well..
Little things like this thread, and conversations you have elsewhere on the internet, futzing around with it yourselves.. discovering things like there isn't One True GUI, and nor should there be, and that some people think there should be, and so on..
Simultaneously, the best part and worst part about linux is there's so much -choice-.. I personally love having KDE for working, XFCE for casual computing, and LXDE for gaming.. other people would rather have Just One UI.
OpenGL 4.5 and Vulkan are both supported under Linux, there are over 1400 games in the Steam store for Linux, and the future's never looked brighter for Linux as a gaming platform.
But who cares? I'm certainly not going to put WindowsAnything on my boxes, and i'm not paying Sony for their underpowered rigs, nor Apple for their over priced, under powered rigs..
I just want to play Elite without selling my soul to do it.
It's nice to know I'm not the only one.
=(
For those want to understand what's Steam Machines are about (physically)
http://www.pcworld.com/article/2893...ails-and-pictures-for-every-model.html#slide1
I have to say some of those are very sexy beasts.
http://www.pcworld.com/article/2893...ails-and-pictures-for-every-model.html#slide1
I have to say some of those are very sexy beasts.
And of course they're using my distribution of choice... like everything else, including many of the other distributions. At least it isn't Ubuntu based.
(No, but seriously, though no disrespect to those that use Ubuntu.)I don't see the Steam Machines getting that much traction, even though I think they're kind of neat as well. I hope I'm wrong. Either way, I think it's a good thing that they're trying and spreading awareness and interest. If I was a console gamer, I'd consider getting one. As it is now, I do run Steam on my PCs, including my new Debian/KDE laptop.
For what it's worth, I first heard about and got Elite: Dangerous on Steam. If I had heard about it sooner, I would have been a backer for it, but hopefully I've made up for it some now getting the LEP.
...
I'm not sure how to put this, but Elite: Dangerous just seems like a high end GNU/Linux title to me. With the detailed full scale galaxy and sci-fi space pilot sim. type game that it is, it seems almost perfect for those of us that use GNU/Linux. Come on FD, embrace your inner geeks. You know you want to.
What's in it for FD? Well, other than giving them a voice from the moral high ground and getting to play Elite: Dangerous on GNU/Linux machines themselves, I'm fairly certain Elite: Dangerous is the type of title the GNU/Linux community would get behind (the only thing that would top that is if it were F&OS, but I'm not expecting that any time soon - maybe when FD retires support of it, passing the torch to the community - that'd be cool). We aren't the most numerous of gamers out there (yet, though technically that's already somewhat debatable), but we are among the most influential in our own way.
...
Here's an out-of-the-blue example from this thread of what I mean by saying Elite: Dangerous feels like a high end GNU/Linux title to me. Of course they'd have a game of it up and running.
Last edited:
It appears that this thread has gotten derailed somewhat. Hypothetical and philosophical arguments aside, I would be more than happy in creating a new thread (mods agreement OFC) on how we can actually push forward in getting it working (thx to an earlier suggestion).
Personally I am more than willing to start off a more technical thread on the possibility that we may indeed get it to run through some sort of WINE/POL method.
P.S. this whole thread has made for some fantastic reading However with the supposedly imminent arrival of the new DX11 wrapper for wine, maybe a new thread could concentrate more on that?
Personally I am more than willing to start off a more technical thread on the possibility that we may indeed get it to run through some sort of WINE/POL method.
P.S. this whole thread has made for some fantastic reading
However with the supposedly imminent arrival of the new DX11 wrapper for wine, maybe a new thread could concentrate more on that?It appears that this thread has gotten derailed somewhat. Hypothetical and philosophical arguments aside, I would be more than happy in creating a new thread (mods agreement OFC) on how we can actually push forward in getting it working (thx to an earlier suggestion).
Personally I am more than willing to start off a more technical thread on the possibility that we may indeed get it to run through some sort of WINE/POL method.
P.S. this whole thread has made for some fantastic reading
I am waiting for full Wine release with DX11. They are starting to add patches, but most likely finish will be in few months time. Then we will have some ontopic chat
While I am hoping for getting ED to run under Wine, I still will hope for native port if SM takes off. That's only real metric FD have right now and I wouldn't want to see them taking risks.
I agree. Whoever does create a link please post back here with the link.
ED on Wine - report #1
Today for no good reason I decided to hack around a bit and play around ED on Wine. Previously I never got further about installation. This time I got one step ahead - as previously reported on this thread, I got run a launcher.
For technical details story is this - there's no big issues running actual .NET 4.0 libraries on Wine, at least for wine 32-bit prefix. Problem however is installation - Microsoft tends to make these complex installation paths with various tools. Part of .NET 4.0 dlls are installed using Windows service WUSA, which is not implemented yet in Wine. One of these dlls - mscoree.dll - is main reason why EDLauncher most likely won't run on clean Wine install, as it is simply missing, nevermind that .NET installer told you everything's peachy (in short it's lying). What I did I installed it on Windows 32-bit version and dug out and put in right place (windows/system32). And vola, it worked.
Visuals appear at first and then disappear as you move around it but big button is still there and that's all what matters. However login works, machine verification works, download and installation works.
Fun was cut short however as despite me running second to newest development Wine I got nice 'fixme' lines as expected:
So it is just beginning of the road. As Wine development version 1.7 (currently at 1.7.51) gets more and more code for DirectX11 support I will report on how ED runs on it time after time.
Today for no good reason I decided to hack around a bit and play around ED on Wine. Previously I never got further about installation. This time I got one step ahead - as previously reported on this thread, I got run a launcher.
For technical details story is this - there's no big issues running actual .NET 4.0 libraries on Wine, at least for wine 32-bit prefix. Problem however is installation - Microsoft tends to make these complex installation paths with various tools. Part of .NET 4.0 dlls are installed using Windows service WUSA, which is not implemented yet in Wine. One of these dlls - mscoree.dll - is main reason why EDLauncher most likely won't run on clean Wine install, as it is simply missing, nevermind that .NET installer told you everything's peachy (in short it's lying). What I did I installed it on Windows 32-bit version and dug out and put in right place (windows/system32). And vola, it worked.
Visuals appear at first and then disappear as you move around it but big button is still there and that's all what matters. However login works, machine verification works, download and installation works.
Fun was cut short however as despite me running second to newest development Wine I got nice 'fixme' lines as expected:
fixme:dxgi:dxgi_output_GetDisplayModeList iface 0x1bf968, format DXGI_FORMAT_B8G8R8A8_UNORM, flags 0x1, mode_count 0x2a0e844, desc (nil) partial stub!
fixme:dxgi:dxgi_output_GetDisplayModeList iface 0x1bf968, format DXGI_FORMAT_B8G8R8A8_UNORM, flags 0x1, mode_count 0x2a0e844, desc 0x10bd7d40 partial stub!
fixme:d3d11
fixme:dxgi:dxgi_device_init Ignoring adapter type.
fixme:d3d11:device_parent_create_swapchain_surface device_parent 0x1b8c30, container_parent 0x1f3af0, wined3d_desc 0x2a0e1f4, surface 0x2a0e1dc partial stub!
fixme:d3d11:device_parent_create_swapchain_surface Implement DXGI<->wined3d usage conversion
So it is just beginning of the road. As Wine development version 1.7 (currently at 1.7.51) gets more and more code for DirectX11 support I will report on how ED runs on it time after time.
Can we you post this as the start for that new thread?
Thanks Peteris, that's splendid work!
Elite wants to come to Linux SO BADLY that Frontier's own would-be customers would drag it kicking and screaming themselves.. Not just whine about it and wish and cry woe is us.
What a waste of good faith and good customers..
Your amazing efforts would go a lot farther aways if there was a native port and we were all helping each other, and helping Frontier themselves, instead of this colossal pain in the ass effort you find you're going through.
good on you.
Get your heads out of your.. sand, Frontier. Linux WANTS this game! There's clearly enough of us that, if you sold it to us full price, you'd make back the money it cost to port it. We would obviously even be willing to support ourselves, and your reputation wouldn't suffer one bit, in fact, it would probably get a pretty good boost. You would also find yourself with a customer base willing to HELPFULLY maintain the port, with high quality bug reports, and less noise in the signal.
i can't imagine anyone would look at:
- this thread,
- the threads like it on Frontier's forums
- the increasing amount of threads like it on Steam
- the efforts of those with the patience for WINE
...And NOT see every business reason in the world to port this game to Linux.
Google around, virtually none of the game developers which ported to Linux has regretted it. Once upon a time, David Braben told tuxradar that Linux was missing a 'common platform' for things like games, but with SteamOS and Elite: Dangerous being in Steam as it is already, how much more common a distribution platform could possibly be needed? Hell, Linux even supports newer versions of OpenGL that OSX can't even handle.
It was pointed out to me that business decisions aren't made based on emotions? but looking at the facts, I can't escape the possibility that they really just are hostile towards Linux.
I wait every day to be proved wrong. The Elite series has always been my favorite games since the 80s.. It's crazy that Linux gamers, the most technical gamers in existence , would be left out forever from a SPACE game..
C'mon Frontier, at LEAST explain what the holdup could POSSIBLY be.
Elite wants to come to Linux SO BADLY that Frontier's own would-be customers would drag it kicking and screaming themselves.. Not just whine about it and wish and cry woe is us.
What a waste of good faith and good customers..
Your amazing efforts would go a lot farther aways if there was a native port and we were all helping each other, and helping Frontier themselves, instead of this colossal pain in the ass effort you find you're going through.
good on you.
Get your heads out of your.. sand, Frontier. Linux WANTS this game! There's clearly enough of us that, if you sold it to us full price, you'd make back the money it cost to port it. We would obviously even be willing to support ourselves, and your reputation wouldn't suffer one bit, in fact, it would probably get a pretty good boost. You would also find yourself with a customer base willing to HELPFULLY maintain the port, with high quality bug reports, and less noise in the signal.
i can't imagine anyone would look at:
- this thread,
- the threads like it on Frontier's forums
- the increasing amount of threads like it on Steam
- the efforts of those with the patience for WINE
...And NOT see every business reason in the world to port this game to Linux.
Google around, virtually none of the game developers which ported to Linux has regretted it. Once upon a time, David Braben told tuxradar that Linux was missing a 'common platform' for things like games, but with SteamOS and Elite: Dangerous being in Steam as it is already, how much more common a distribution platform could possibly be needed? Hell, Linux even supports newer versions of OpenGL that OSX can't even handle.
It was pointed out to me that business decisions aren't made based on emotions? but looking at the facts, I can't escape the possibility that they really just are hostile towards Linux.
I wait every day to be proved wrong. The Elite series has always been my favorite games since the 80s.. It's crazy that Linux gamers, the most technical gamers in existence , would be left out forever from a SPACE game..
C'mon Frontier, at LEAST explain what the holdup could POSSIBLY be.
Last edited:
I know a "die harder" that will NOT buy it UNTIL it's released on Linux!
Actually he's still playing '84 Elite (emulated), and thinks that he'll become Elite in that BEFORE the E" D version of Elite is brought out.
Actually he's still playing '84 Elite (emulated), and thinks that he'll become Elite in that BEFORE the E" D version of Elite is brought out.