Gaming On Linux With Newest AMD Catalyst Driver Remains Slow 178
An anonymous reader writes The AMD Catalyst binary graphics driver has made a lot of improvements over the years, but it seems that NVIDIA is still leading in the Linux game with their shared cross-platform driver. Tests done by Phoronix of the Catalyst 15.3 Linux Beta found on Ubuntu 15.04 shows that NVIDIA continues leading over AMD Catalyst with several different GPUs on BioShock Infinite, a game finally released for Linux last week. With BioShock Infinite on Linux, years old mid-range GeForce GPUs were clobbering the high-end Radeon R9 290 and other recent AMD GPUs tested. The poor showing wasn't limited to BS:I though as the Metro Redux games were re-tested too on the new drivers and found the NVIDIA graphics still ran significantly faster and certainly a different story than under Windows.
Nothing new (Score:5, Interesting)
It's been this way for years. ATI/AMD support for Linux is unbelievably bad. nVidia support is basically perfect, with the exception of the open-source issue. In the past, I've bought a brand new (nVidia) video card, right after it was released, brought it home, and got it running under Linux, day 1, with no headaches. If you want decent Linux graphics, go nVidia.
Not really new on Windows either (Score:5, Interesting)
While AMD fans cry foul, it really is true that AMD drivers are worse on Windows than nVidia drivers. It isn't the massive gap like on Linux, but it is there. OpenGL stuff sees particular issues, with slower performance or even stuff outright failing to run on AMD cards, but other issues as well. My 7970M in my laptop has been headaches since I got the thing and only recently got up to a competent level.
Problems aside, they are just slow with updates for things like Crossfire. Multi-GPU support generally requires game specific profiles to work well, or even work at all. nVidia is quite fast at getting their SLI profiles out, but AMD hasn't had an update to Crossfire profiles since 2014.
AMD just doesn't focus on the software side of things like nVidia does. Their hardware development team seems to be top notch but their software development is lacking.
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
I jumped from nvidia to amd because nvidia drivers have become so bad if you're not on the "current flagship" card. There have been a hell of a lot of serious problems with nvidia drivers over the last two years on windows machines. Off the top of my head: TDR problem caused by drivers, the original thread on the nvidia forums was nearly 700k posts long, with 3m views. The fix apparently was due to them dropping voltages so low it caused the card to crash, that was fixed for about three releases and then
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
nVidia support is basically perfect, with the exception of the open-source issue.
Don't forget their dire OpenCL support.
Re: (Score:2)
When ATI made their video drivers open sourced, I was all excited. I am disappointed that their drivers still suck for gaming and other 3D stuff in Linux. NVIDIA still wins. :(
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
There isn't one single "Linux crowd", and not everyone, or even nearly everyone run Linux for political reasons. RMS Gnussolini's are very much minority.
I very much welcome any proprietary software on Linux that does the job better.
Re: (Score:2)
I don't game and my linux box has intel graphics. :)
I would consider a "steam machine" though if I wanted a new development box for my office desktop. Whether I stuck with nouveau or loaded the properietary graphics would depend on whether the free drivers were sufficient.
Re: (Score:2)
There isn't one single "Linux crowd", and not everyone, or even nearly everyone run Linux for political reasons. RMS Gnussolini's are very much minority.
I very much welcome any proprietary software on Linux that does the job better.
I think you are wrong, and I think you are not going to get a proprietary alternative that's as fast as it could be. The interfaces needed to make graphics faster on Linux are all EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL, meaning that they can't legally be used by proprietary (read: faster) kernel modules. So basically, the interfaces that are needed are, in fact, politicized.
Re: (Score:2)
The kernel modification is merely a shim. Much of the work in the NVidia drivers is in the replacement for the OpenGL libraries, which are heavily modified by NVidia and difficult to reverse engineer.
Re: (Score:2)
I think you are missing his point. Regardless of what is technically/theoretically possible, right now, the nvidia proprietary drivers do outperform the free drivers.
Yes, yes, it's because nvidia refuse to publish their specs and that makes them evil and the free guys have to reverse engineer everything and it's hard work and they're always behind and bla bla and boo hoo. But that doesn't change the fact that the free drivers don't peform as well as the proprietary drivers do in the real world today.
If the
Re: (Score:2, Troll)
Re: (Score:2)
Thank you. And you notice how many just gloss over the fact that despite all their "GNU" talk when push comes to shove they throw their convictions right out the windows for better performance?
This is why I think Linux is gonna bleed users after the Win 10 release, I have a feeling most aren't giving as shit about free as in freedom, just free as in beer and with Win 10 being the latter all those bullshitters talking FOSS and GNU are gonna quietly slink away and get their free Win 10 and see the proprietary is faster without all the BS and just not come back.
Why would I ever do tha?t As it stands now I have several legitament free windows keys for the last 5 of so windows desktop OS's and keys for several of the server releases none are used exsept for one WinXP key for VMs and and my duel boot Linux WinXP destop for visual studio. My servers my laptop my other destops run Linux exlusivly. I am likely to never going back to windows without a major reason.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL is more a case of: copyright law does not specify what counts as derived work (in particular, whether kernel modules do or do not count as such), so we're giving you a clear criteria of what we believe. If you have a different opinion you are likely to annoy people and might have to defend your theory in court.
It's not what Linus believes, as he has stated on numerous occasions when question on whether or not kernel modules were derivative works. The concept of the EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL was invented by Linux developers who disagrees with Linus on this, and wanted to force hardware vendors to open source their software anyway, even though there are numerous legal reasons they can't. For example, a lot of those people copy code from each other and violate copyright all over the place, and there's a gentlemen's agreem
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I thought APIs couldn't be copyrighted? You know, like what the Oracle v. Google Android-Java lawsuit was all about?
If so, then without copyright protection
Re: (Score:2)
I thought APIs couldn't be copyrighted? You know, like what the Oracle v. Google Android-Java lawsuit was all about?
If so, then without copyright protection GPL is worthless - GPL requires copyright in order to work (because copyright gives you certain rights - GPL gives you MORE rights in exchange for agreeing to certain conditions - if you don't agree, your basic rights under copyright law apply). In that case the APIs are unprotected.
You really need to read the GNU Manifesto. The GPL is an instrumentality of the GNU Manifesto, and the intent is to use the opponents momentum against themselves. Think "Legal Jujitsu". RMS would prefer Copyright not exist, but since it does, there is a way to force it to behave as if it does not exist by combining it with other legal constructs surrounding the grant of rights under Copyright.
It's a license issue. The code is copyright. You accept the terms of the license, you are granted a right to us
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
This. Free software is great and I'll always check out the free alternatives before I consider paying for anything, but not all of us think that all proprietary software is inherently evil. Most (all?) of the people I know are much more pragmatic and interested in getting real-world work done than that. I'd love to hand over cash for a powerful video editor that is easier to use than cinellera or a native version of FL Studio so that I can finally ditch wine.
I for one have absolutely zero problem paying fo
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
The Radeon HD 4890 launched early 2009, not in 2011 as you claim.
Further, if an OS that comes later doesn't support older hardware, I'm going to blame the OS, not the hardware or its drivers. That's what everyone did during the XP->Vista transition, right?
Re: (Score:2)
Right because I can buy any video card and driver made in the last 10 years and it will just work and always continue to work
Re: (Score:2)
Can I LMAO at the blatant hypocrisy of the Linux crowd?
Not without being a disingenuous douchebag, since you know full well that "the Linux crowd" encompasses a broad spectrum.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
yeah so how do those games bench against nvidia cards half the price?
Re: (Score:2)
With or without using locked-down proprietary drivers?
both? that's what the article is about anyways, that the locked down nvidia stuff gives you 100% better bang for buck(double)? so someone chipping in and saying they have no problems playing some games that should run fine with years old budget cards is not that much of a help to that discusion.
Re: (Score:2)
Single data point, personal experience anecdotal and all that jazz, but:
In my Linux Desktop rig (Mint 17 Desktop) I've run an ATI R9 270 using Catalyst and an nVidia GeForce 760 using nouveau and CUDA (not at the same time); I've been a lot happier with the GeForce with the nouveau drivers than the performance out of the Radeon. Also, installing the CUDA drivers to take advantage of the parallel compiling/processing has taken the performance through the roof and IMHO blew away the 270. The nVidia ran coo
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
The driver would blue screen my Windows box on boot several times before finally clearing and letting the system run. This is before even getting a login prompt.
Pair of AMD 4870's (so old cards).
[John]
Too but it bluntly (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
This is true, though I suspect it's not as bad if you use the C++ wrapper. More importantly, CUDA's tooling is far superior. But it's still Nvidia-only.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Pair of AMD 4870's with four monitors would blue screen on start up almost daily.
[John]
What's REALLY interesting is (Score:1)
Playing the same game on Linux and Windows.
More games are turning up on Steam with a Linux port, frame rate may or may not be higher but the controls are far more responsive under Linux making the same games just nicer to play on Linux.
Re: (Score:2)
They may be playing the same game, but the problem is that the code might be vastly optimised towards one platform. Chances are they didn't spend nearly as much time optimising for Linux as they did for Windows, even if they DID port it over. This is not a fair comparison by any means.
Past that, Linux having "far more responsive" controls - again, I'd like to see a fair comparison (and, personally, how the hell you'd tell the difference past a certain point anyway - unless it "feels" unresponsive on one p
Re: (Score:2)
I'd like to see a fair comparison
here you go [gamespot.com]
Re: (Score:2)
Sounds like the approach Valve took when porting Source.
Anyone Running Windows Steam Through Wine? (Score:3)
I started gaming again over the cold Winter months, I have a Windows 7 desktop with Steam that is there for gaming, specifically RPG FPS games like Fallout 3 and Fallout New Vegas. (Neither have native Linux versions for those who don't know.)
I recently upgraded the Windows desktop from an old ATI/AMD graphics card to a newer NVIDIA card due to wanting better Fallout performance. All my other desktops run Gentoo Linux and ATI/AMD cards, probably 66xx or 67xx chipsets.
The only thing stopping me ditching Windows completely is the fact that I have twice as many games in Windows Steam as opposed to Linux Steam, other than that I don't need Windows at all.
But if anyone can confirm if Windows Steam in WINE works well with NVIDIA cards then I may do an upgrade or two so I can ditch Windows completely. I tried it with ATI/AMD cards and had very little success, especially when it came to game performance. But I also have done very little in recent years on NVIDIA cards and WINE gaming.... so any hints here gratefully received!
Re: (Score:2)
Useful stuff, but can you not just still use the 4GB patched exe outside of Steam, like I do currently in Windows?
YEARS and YEARS ago... (Score:3)
when there was a ATI rage128 X11 driver written by enthusiast and Linux people it was basically the BEST
then nvidia saw the marketing and CAD market decided to ship a direct port of their windows driver with all the horrible spec breaking kludges that made it fast...
AMD now released a good driver that doesn't have too many kludges and sticks fairly well to the spec but its slow... they dont want to reveal all their breaking of the spec and kludges that they do on windows...
basically we could have a driver that was fast but it wont be a good (without fudging colours and resolutions etc)
AMD need to look at it like a marketing experience and invest in the software drivers for a couple of years... hey they could blow nvidia out of the water in about 6 months if they had the right team and just went for it...
regards
John Jones
Re: (Score:2)
AMD support isn't that bad (Score:5, Insightful)
It's really not that bad and yes I spent a couple of hours playing BS:I yesterday on my core i7 nVidia 660 Ti gaming system with all settings set to Ultra. My AMD system is a Kaveri APU based system and lo and behold, the only game that requires very low settings is BS:I. As I understand it, BS:I and the other game he mentioned are using some form of emulation, similar to WINE for the game to play, this is true of the Witcher and will probably become more and more common.
So, ONE of my steam games plays better on nVidia than AMD, admitedly, I only have 24 Linux/SteamOS games but I tend to stick with the high profile shooters but one game plays bad and Michael L. makes a big stink. When my Kaveri came out, all the comparisons were against the top of the line i7 and i5 processors and it looked like crap. Using a car analogy, a Camry with a V6 compared to a Hellcat Challenger will look pretty slow but for all other purposes the Camry will have more than enough acceleration to satisfy the average driver.
Hell I'm just happy the games are coming to Linux, whether the run perfectly or not, I'd rather play on Linux in low settings than Windows in high.
The thing I enjoyed most about this thread... (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Re:Great for nvidia but, (Score:4, Interesting)
The people beta-testing SteamOS or the Steam hardware? Steam basically ran a competition over Christmas part of which involved early access to the hardware.
Beyond that, who wouldn't? Indie gamers have a vast wealth of software at their disposal that'll run on any old machine that they haven't got a Windows licence for. It's literally the "thorw this in the kid's bedroom" kind of hardware and you can play an awful lot of games. Turn on big picture mode or go as far as putting the SteamOS iso in the drive and you have a self-contained gaming platform that you don't need to manage for them.
1/3rd of my Steam library is available on Linux. It's far from what it used to be. I could keep a kid/teenager entertained for YEARS with what I have on Linux.
And then include family sharing, streaming, etc. and they can play all those games while I am.
Re:Great for nvidia but, (Score:4, Insightful)
This is changing. Rather fast. I have 50 Linux games on steam, and all run fine on my 4 year old Core i5 and AMD 6630M laptop. Sure detail levels aren't great, but they aren't bad either. I get 40+fps on war thunder. Still downloading bioshock.
Surprisingly I have yet to have an issue running any of these games. I'm not running Ubuntu (or other debian based), so I expected issues. I am going to experiment with my desktop later when I get time to put a modern linux distro on.
Gaming on Linux is looking good actually.
Re: (Score:1)
Gaming on Linux is looking good actually.
I suppose that depends on what you want out of it, and your point of view...
I have over 2,000 games on Steam, the vast majority of which will NEVER get a Linux version...
Some of my computers currently run Windows 7, some run 8.1... All will get a free upgrade to Windows 10...
When games start to come out ONLY for Linux, let me know... until then, what exactly is the point?
---
Don't misunderstand me, I get the value of Linux for servers, but I just don't see a use for it for desktop machines, other than perh
Re:Great for nvidia but, (Score:5, Interesting)
The point? I don't know there is one precisely. I game on linux because it is my preferred platform. I have been using it for so long now I actually have a ls.bat file on my windows machine somewhere.
Linux is fairly useful on the desktop. I did my entire honours project some years ago under linux (including PCB/circuit design and embedded code). In general, I have found it to 'just work' in modern times, unless you are doing something exotic. Beyond that I would love to see it used more in industry. It would be much easier to manage a SCADA under linux, where the bastard operator from hell can't plug in a usb stick with 1002 viruses and I can ssh in to troubleshoot coms problems. Yeah you can disable USB storage under windows too, but it is a PITA.
I am not saying the average user should be running linux (though I suppose we can see how Steam machines do), but it is rather nice to be able to start up a game at home without having to reboot.
Re:Great for nvidia but, (Score:5, Interesting)
These things are about momentum. Diesel is really common here (my boss drives a diesel hatchback, and gets incredible km/l). Every filling station here stocks diesel. Is it a better technology? Maybe... It is really expensive to fix when it breaks. So it is in a way a really good analogy for Linux. In the some places (the USA), everyone only uses it for servers (big haulage trucks) but in other places it gets used everywhere.
There are pros and cons to every OS. Linux is my preferred platform because I am familiar with it, and I like the interface. I have not delusions of superiority. I have had good experiences with hardware support, and apart from printers (I do not own one, so it is a non-issue for me), I have not worried about linux support for hardware since around 2005. Also, a lot of hardware seems to work better: 3g modems for example - they don't require me to install the operators bs bloatware to use under linux. They just work...
I think the point here, is someone is making an effort to build diesel filling stations. You can still get petrol and it will never go away, but you now have options, and each has pros and cons. I like diesel. It has really good torque. Modern diesels have come a long way in terms of reliability (early diesels were terrible). They aren't perfect, but they do the job.
Re: (Score:2)
Every filling station here stocks diesel. Is it a better technology? Maybe... It is really expensive to fix when it breaks.
Since shooting holes in automotive analogies is a hobby, I should point out here that the modern TGDI engines (turbocharged gasoline direct injection) have all the same parts as a diesel, and as such they cost just as much to maintain. However, they also give similar efficiency (they'll continue to improve for some time yet) while not requiring such a heavy engine block*. These engines tend to be slightly less high-revving, and turbocharging lends itself to producing mid-range power, so the benefits of dies
Re: (Score:2)
This has not been my experience, though that is anecdotal. Perhaps because people tend to drive TGDI vehicles harder than diesels. In any case, do you have a reference for this?
Re: (Score:2)
This has not been my experience, though that is anecdotal. Perhaps because people tend to drive TGDI vehicles harder than diesels. In any case, do you have a reference for this?
What do you mean, reference? Look at the mileage figures, since the last revamp they're almost good for something. The really small engines (2 liter and below) are returning exceptional mileage for their maximum output.
Re: (Score:3)
Nice troll. But inaccurate on both counts:
http://commons.wikimedia.org/w... [wikimedia.org]
I could be in any part of the green area. Try again.
Re: (Score:2)
Why do you think people want games on Linux? It's because rebooting to Windows is tedious.
Linux is the better desktop and working environment, so it is what you use when you don't play games. Having your desktop be an alt-tab away is convenient to quickly switch between gaming and other things.
Now why isn't the demand for games on Linux higher? Because most people who use Linux are professionals, and they don't spend that much of their time on the computer playing games, so when they need to, suffering the
Re: (Score:2)
Linux is the better desktop and working environment
It is? Citation?
I fully get that market share doesn't always call out the better product, sometimes inferior products succeed while the better one fails... but Windows more or less owns the desktop market. Even OS X has multiple times more market share than Linux does.
---
I keep hearing people say "Linux is better", but I don't see any specific reasons. The impression I get is that "Linux is better because it isn't Windows". Frankly, that is not a reason, it is an opinion, which is fine, but it is like
Re: (Score:2)
Fair enough, but neither of those is absolute when the term "better" is used.
Linux does have some technical things that it does better than Windows, but that doesn't make it a better OS.
Re:Great for nvidia but, (Score:4, Informative)
or perhaps techheads in general like to have their "special stuff".
When Windows 8 came out, I had 3 very nontechnical friends who found themselves "upgraded" to an interface which was completely foreign and confusing to them. They called me and said that their computers had "gone weird" on them. My solution was to put an xubuntu livecd into their drives and let them play with it for a bit. All 3 of them said that they preferred it because it "made more sense" and was "more like it used to be", all 3 agreed that I should wipe the windows partition and install xubuntu. All 3 are still using it.
(of which I am one)
LOL. A gamer is not a "techhead".
buy anything and it will work on Windows. Linux? I'd have to check first
Go buy a Packard Bell FastMedia Remote control and then come talk to me. You'll find it's simply impossible to use in anything newer than Windows me due to the WinNT line not allowing direct access to serial ports. Mine still works brilliantly in linux.
I literally can't remember the last time I plugged something into a linux machine and it didn't just work. It might have been around 2007, but I suspect it was more like 2003. And I get my hands on weird and wonderfully exotic hardware every now and then.
What does Linux in 2015 do that Windows does not?
Just a couple off the top of my head:
1. Shows you what it's doing when it's busy (assuming you bother to ask)
2. Mounts mounting volumes in virtually every filesystem ever invented
3. Supports loopback mounting (i.e mount an iso [or any disk image] without thirdparty software)
4. Supports more than 25 attached disks.
5. Boots into a live, usable environment from a USB stick or DVD
6. Has a themeable, customisable interface
7. Supports MUCH MUCH more hardware
8. Runs on ARM devices
9. Runs on a Space Station
10. Serves up most of the web's traffic
11. Provides virtually all of the world's supercomputing
12. Has tens of thousands of high-quality applications available for free and about 3 clicks away from being installed
13. Provides free, 1-click updates
14. Doesn't have any arbitrary limitations imposed based on how much you spent on it.
15. Doesn't need a virus scanner
16. Doesn't suck ass
Have you ever even used Linux? If you tried Red Hat 5.0 back in 1998, it's probably time you took another look. In 2015, it's superior to windows in every respect except one: available proprietary software. And that's changing.
Re: (Score:3)
When Windows 8 came out, I had 3 very nontechnical friends who found themselves "upgraded" to an interface which was completely foreign and confusing to them. They called me and said that their computers had "gone weird" on them. My solution was to put an xubuntu livecd into their drives and let them play with it for a bit. All 3 of them said that they preferred it because it "made more sense" and was "more like it used to be", all 3 agreed that I should wipe the windows partition and install xubuntu. All 3 are still using it.
Many people use their computer as nothing more than an Internet and e-mail machine, and in that respect, it largely doesn't matter what OS they run.
Many of these people are moving to tablets as they discover they don't really want or need a computer.
Re: (Score:2)
Many people use their computer as nothing more than an Internet and e-mail machine, and in that respect, it largely doesn't matter what OS they run.
Wait, what? I thought windows did everything better?!?
Many of these people are moving to linux-based tablets as they discover they don't really want or need a computer.
Fixed.
Re: (Score:2)
No, they are Android tablets... but nice try...
(yes, yes, I understand the base under that, but no one cares and it isn't going to carry over in the desktop market)
Re: (Score:2)
How much do Microsoft pay you for each post on here?
it isn't going to carry over in the desktop market
Then I guess you should tell all the netbook makers that they're wasting their time. And you should call google and tell them not to bother with chrome OS. Likewise firefox OS.
Re: (Score:2)
Just a couple off the top of my head:
1. Shows you what it's doing when it's busy (assuming you bother to ask)
2. Mounts mounting volumes in virtually every filesystem ever invented
3. Supports loopback mounting (i.e mount an iso [or any disk image] without thirdparty software)
4. Supports more than 25 attached disks.
5. Boots into a live, usable environment from a USB stick or DVD
6. Has a themeable, customisable interface
7. Supports MUCH MUCH more hardware
8. Runs on ARM devices
9. Runs on a Space Station
10. Serves up most of the web's traffic
11. Provides virtually all of the world's supercomputing
12. Has tens of thousands of high-quality applications available for free and about 3 clicks away from being installed
13. Provides free, 1-click updates
14. Doesn't have any arbitrary limitations imposed based on how much you spent on it.
15. Doesn't need a virus scanner
16. Doesn't suck ass
Have you ever even used Linux? If you tried Red Hat 5.0 back in 1998, it's probably time you took another look. In 2015, it's superior to windows in every respect except one: available proprietary software. And that's changing.
Lord... that is a nerd's wet dream to be sure... 99% of the consumer market couldn't care less about that list... #16 betrays your feelings, I have found that most of the die hard Linux supports are really Windows haters who can't afford OS X.
Linux works fine, I am well aware of this, but working fine isn't enough... Get back to me when Adobe Photoshop, MS Office, TurboTax, Quickbooks, etc. have native Linux versions.
People do not buy computers and run OSes for their own sake, they do it to run their pr
Linux and Windows (Score:2)
It's actually okay if 99% of consumers don't care. They are okay with the most basic computing devices. It's cool if you don't think that Linux's features are worthwhile too, but the thing is, if you're already a programmer then having complete control, scripting access, and the source code to your OS is quite useful. Clearly Windows does some things that Linux does not, but that does not mean that each is not useful in its own sphere.
Microsoft pretty much does suck though. Windows as an OS is maybe not qui
Re: (Score:2)
Microsoft pretty much does suck though. Windows as an OS is maybe not quite as good as its software ecosystem, although it does have certain advantages. Microsoft managed to completely overhaul its sound and color rendering systems for Vista without any problems, whereas the contemporaneous roll-out of Pulseaudio is shall we say not remembered fondly. Now if they'd stop fucking up their UI they might end up with a half-decent system.
MS isn't so bad, now that Steve Balmer is gone. Look at the changes already being made since he left. MS Office on Android? That would NEVER have happened under Steve. Windows 10 for free?
Changes are coming, there is fresh new blood that understands that MS has to adapt or die, and I think they got someone in place in time to do is.
Vista was a mess at launch, but that is largely due to launching early when the hardware and drivers weren't ready. Windows 7 is really just Vista SP3, but it wouldn't have
Re: (Score:2)
Couldn't agree more.
Re: (Score:2)
I tried 8 and couldn't stand it, 8.1 doesn't bother me and it is on most of my computers now.
So your solution to hating windows 8 was to wait until MS fixed it for you. Me? I would have expected to be able to fix it myself, and I would have uninstalled it when that wasn't possible.
Re: (Score:2)
So your solution to hating windows 8 was to wait until MS fixed it for you. Me? I would have expected to be able to fix it myself, and I would have uninstalled it when that wasn't possible.
My solution was to continue to run Windows 7. I never used 8 on anything other than a test system.
Once 8.1 came out, I gave it another look and was impressed at the changes made. Someone at MS did listen.
As for "waiting for MS to fix it", well, that is their job. At this point, Windows has such an installed base that it would take years and years of massive stupidity at MS to really change anything.
All the software that I need to run, generally runs best on Windows. This is true for most people, hence t
Re: (Score:2)
see my replies elsewhere, you've said nothing new or interesting here.
Re: (Score:2)
99% of the consumer market couldn't care less about that list
You didn't specify things that 99% of people care about. Personally I couldn't care less what 99% of people want.
I have found that most of the die hard Linux supports are really Windows haters who can't afford OS X.
I think most of those people are using OS X at this point, though a couple of people I know use Linux on Mac hardware.
I think OS X is even worse than windows - that's a truly terrible UI and it makes the windows UI look almost good by comparison.
Get back to me when Adobe Photoshop, MS Office, TurboTax, Quickbooks, etc. have native Linux versions.
I actually prefer gimp over photoshop, because I'm used to it.
I actually prefer openoffice over MS Office, because I'm used to it and it has more feature
Re: (Score:2)
I'm not actually interested in what "people" buy computers for, I'm interested in what I want to do.
Good for you, but that isn't what is being discussed.
The original point is that Linux has "growing share" or "growing gaming share" or "more interest in Linux gaming", etc.
Which is a bunch of bantha dung.
By all means, use Linux, no crime in that. Just understand that you're using a very marginal (in terms of market share) desktop OS that will never be anything other than such.
Re: (Score:2)
The original point is that Linux has "growing share" or "growing gaming share" or "more interest in Linux gaming", etc.
Actually, as I've pointed out elsewhere, the original question was "why would anybody game on Linux?". And I've already addressed that elsewhere.
Which is a bunch of bantha dung.
Bullshit, you clearly have no idea what you're talking about. The advent of native Linux games will cause a reduction in the number of windows installs out there, which will change the figures. I know more than one person who has deleted the windows partition they used to use solely for gaming since the advent of steam for Linux. These people will not be buying any
Re: (Score:2)
Not to be judgemental, but it sounds to me like you're wasting your life.
I like supporting indie developers and I buy almost every Humble Bundle for charity reasons...
The majority of those games will never be played, but the collection does grow...
Not installing windows.
Got it, so it is an "Anything but Windows" mindset...
You know, "Windows Sucks" doesn't translate into "Linux is great". The 1.5% Linux desktop marketshare would seem to indicate that is a true statement.
I suppose my interest is to simply hear why Linux on the desktop is so great, but instead I keep hearing "It isn't Windows".
Why the h
Re: (Score:2)
So the majority of your Steam collection comes from Humble Bundles? Well, I have good news for you, then. The majority of Humble Bundles have Linux support! Certainly the majority of indie games in Humble Bundle. Check it out. You may be pleasantly surprised.
As for Windows, I don't mind it too much. It has its place. I use Linux as my home and work interface, because it suits the way I like to work. I use the Enlightenment window manager, as it is extremely customisable, allowing me to tweak it to e
Re: (Score:2)
The majority of those games will never be played
Then why does it matter what operating systems they support?
Got it, so it is an "Anything but Windows" mindset...
No, actually. I chose Linux over both BSD and Mac OS because I prefer it. I might consider the latest AmigaOS if it didn't require exotic and expensive hardware, but that's because I'm an AmigaOS fanboy - I don't know how practical it would be in real life, and I suspect I'd need linux to get things done.
"Windows Sucks" doesn't translate into "Linux is great"
That's true, but you have things backwards again - "Linux is great" does translate to "Windows sucks".
I've used Linux exclusively for 10+ years, a
Re: (Score:2)
I've used Linux exclusively for 10+ years, and I've come to rely on those 10,000 little things that make it great. And when those things are not available on windows, I scream in frustration.
Fair enough, but then frankly you don't really count.
Why? Because you've used it for 10 years and in case you haven't noticed, it's usage on the desktop has gone exactly nowhere.
I have no doubt there will continue to be people like you, 20 years from now. Nothing wrong with that, some people like to tinker with such things. But you'll always be in the vast minority.
Re: (Score:2)
I'm not sure what any of this has to do with gaming, or why I want to play games on Linux
it's usage on the desktop has gone exactly nowhere.
Bullshit.
Re: (Score:1)
I thought about my last reply...
I wanted to add one more thing... It seems that the primary reason for most people to run Linux is because "it isn't Windows"...
This doesn't strike me as enough of a reason for it to go anywhere. You and I post on Slashdot, so we don't count. The average person uses Windows, has for most of their computer life, and sees no reason to change.
The only other visible option is the Mac with OS X, and I think some people do look at that, until they see the price and then they run
Re: (Score:2)
I wanted to add one more thing... It seems that the primary reason for most people to run Linux is because "it isn't Windows"...
I think you're confusing cause and effect, people ask why you don't use Windows and the answer is because you want to use something other than Windows. Particularly when the person you're talking to doesn't feel the same things chafing, maybe even though it works for you it doesn't work for me and it's not just about "being different" but that we have different needs or priorities. Just like every graphics tool discussion usually ends up with why you don't use Photoshop. It's the way of things when one tool
Re: (Score:2)
I think you're confusing cause and effect, people ask why you don't use Windows and the answer is because you want to use something other than Windows.
I bring up that point for the simple reason that I do not believe that most people actually care what OS is on their computer.
People just want to know that it works and that it runs the programs they want to run.
On my work machine, I have many programs installed that have no Linux version. It would be a PITA to try and change. I simply must have MS Office, Acrobat (full version, not reader), Photoshop, Quickbooks, etc.
Try doing your taxes on Linux. It can be done, but it is again a PITA.
https://thefearle [wordpress.com]
Re: (Score:2)
The "average person" also used Internet Explorer when it had 95% market share and was really slow at seeking alternatives. Because IE6 worked because sites had to work in IE6, the mainstream only follows once a significant portion of early adopters have led the way. Not that Linux has too many trendsetters, we're "experts" but soccer moms don't take car advice from race car drivers. They want to know what works for a soccer mom.
Changing web browsers is not remotely the same thing as changing OSes. :)
Google got a lot of people to move to Chrome simply due to offering free e-mail that didn't suck (see: Hotmail) and offering great search. Without those two, Chrome would be a foot note.
Netscape was the browser of choice, but frankly it stopped being great at version 3. 4 was bloated and slow, IE was fast.
---
The mistake in thinking that the same thing will happen to Linux is that when you install Linux, your current programs no longe
Re: (Score:2)
Market share is a battle won one step at the time. Either you double 1% to 2% and get a few more to care or you halve to 0.5% and a few less care. That the 90%+ didn't care and still don't care is something that might change if you get the pebble rolling into a landslide, but if the pebble's stuck you're stuck. It's not about making Linux a killer gaming platform, it's about making gaming not be a Linux-killer. If that makes it viable for another 1%, you're making progress.
With respect, I've heard that before... :) Back around 2001, the "Year of the Linux Desktop" was just around the corner.
Here we are, 14 years later...
The reasons Linux never took off on the desktop have nothing to do with technical issues, they are marketing and business issues.
Companies like Dell have tried selling computers with Linux on them, they stopped because it was more trouble than it was worth, the return rate on them was several times higher due to customers expecting to be able to run all their
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
You can probably thank apple for this, to some extent. The growing popularity of the Mac has meant that porting there has become viable and this means fairly generic C++ with Open GL and unixy OS expectations. From there to linux is really just a change of compiler flags.
Well, that and steam.
Re: (Score:2)
If you're serious about playing games, you run Windows... or you should... far fewer headaches and just a better overall experience...
My PS4 would like to have a word with you about that "should run Windows" bit.
Re: (Score:2)
Clearly if it ran windows if would be a PS5.
Re: (Score:2)
Actually, if it ran windows, it would be a PSVista .
Re: (Score:2)
My PS4 would like to have a word with you about that "should run Windows" bit.
On the desktop, and you know it...
People don't care what OS their computers run. PS4 runs whatever it has to run to play games. Their desktop computer runs Windows because that is what runs Office, TurboTax, games, etc.
Linux largely does not. And the bigger issue? Linux doesn't have anything that ONLY runs on Linux.
If Half Life 3 came out and ONLY ran on Linux, you might get a few more people interested, but that would be a pretty stupid move on Valve's part, IMHO, from a sales point of view.
Re: (Score:2)
On the desktop, and you know it...
People don't care what OS their computers run.
True.
PS4 runs whatever it has to run to play games.
BSD
Their desktop computer runs Windows because that is what runs Office, TurboTax, games, etc.
Who needs Windows to run a word processor? Who needs Windows to run TurboTax when the preparation companies own web based products work just fine in almost any web browser? Who needs Windows for games when there's a BSD running PS4?
I don't need Windows:
[CronoCloud@ ~]$ uname -a
Linux 3.19.1-201.fc21.x86_64 #1 SMP Wed Mar 18 04:29:24 UTC 2015 x86_64 x86_64 x86_64 GNU/Linux
[CronoCloud@ ~]$ cat
Fedora release 21 (Twenty One)
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Who needs Windows to run a word processor? Who needs Windows to run TurboTax when the preparation companies own web based products work just fine in almost any web browser? Who needs Windows for games when there's a BSD running PS4?
TurboTax via the web does work, but I still use the software program for various reasons. If you have a complex return (my return last year was 64 pages long), having it locally is easier to deal with. For simple returns, sure, use the web.
That being said, give it a try on Linux, it doesn't work without tricking it, since it is looking for a Windows or Mac based computer.
As for a word processor, not just any will do, it has to be MS Word. That is what the business world uses, if you do anything more than
Re: (Score:2)
If you're serious about playing games, you run Windows... or you should... far fewer headaches and just a better overall experience...
Some people like to play games but aren't "serious about games".
Some people find windows to be a far, far, far worse experience with far far more headaches. To such an extent that if a game is only available for windows then playing it is not worth the headache. I'd really like to play the newer GTA games - But do I want to play them enough to endure installing windows? No way. I'll just find other interesting games to play.
Trying to get stuff to run where it wasn't meant to is just a PITA...
Oh, I know! The PITA involved in getting Bioshock Infinite running was just terrible
Re: (Score:2)
Some people like to play games but aren't "serious about games".
Yes, and that is fine, if you just want to pick from the handful of games with proper Linux ports, I'm sure they work well enough...
But if you are, then Windows it is...
Some people find windows to be a far, far, far worse experience with far far more headaches.
Again, everyone keeps saying this stuff without providing any examples. "Linux is better, Windows sucks".
Those aren't reasons, those are opinions and personal tastes. What exactly does Windows "suck at"?
Oh, I know! The PITA involved in getting Bioshock Infinite running was just terrible! it was such rigmarole!
The fanboy in you is showing... I said getting stuff to run where it wasn't meant to... Get GTA to run on Linux and get back to me... T
Re: (Score:2)
Again, everyone keeps saying this stuff without providing any examples. "Linux is better, Windows sucks".
Those aren't reasons, those are opinions and personal tastes.
And you saying that windows is good isn't an opinion or a personal taste?
Personally, my opinion and personal taste is for an interface that is fast and configurable and doesn't hide useful information in the name of being "user friendly". IMHO when an interface makes the assumption that I'm a moron and that I don't want to see what it is doing with my processor is a bad interface. A concrete example of this is the amount of information provided by the windows task manager vs something like top.
Another examp
Re: (Score:2)
And you saying that windows is good isn't an opinion or a personal taste?
No, that isn't what I said or what other people are saying.
"Windows is better than Linux for the desktop for most people."
^ That is what I'm saying.
Why? It runs the programs that most people want to run, Linux does not.
It is not about technical abilities, it is about "does it run my software".
That is really what people care about. Linux is indeed "good" from a technical point of view. Linux is indeed "good" from a server point of view. Linux is NOT "good" for the average consumer's desktop computer.
Re: (Score:2)
Wow, talk about shifting the goalposts. This started as a discussion of who would game on Linux, and why would they do so. I gave you a bunch of reasons, and rather than respond to them you decided to turn it into a "Linux on the desktop" debate, and what is best for "normal users" and "average people".
I'm not talking about average people, because I couldn't care less what they do on their computers, what operating system they run, or what software they use or what games they play. They can do whatever they
Re: (Score:2)
Personally, my opinion and personal taste is for an interface that is fast and configurable and doesn't hide useful information in the name of being "user friendly". IMHO when an interface makes the assumption that I'm a moron and that I don't want to see what it is doing with my processor is a bad interface. A concrete example of this is the amount of information provided by the windows task manager vs something like top.
Another example, windows makes the assumption that I'm too stupid to know about the maximise button and helpfully maximises the window when I drag it to the top of the screen. Because there's no way I could possibly want a small window at the top of the screen. This infuriates me constantly (well, not constantly, "on the rare occasions I'm forced to do something on a windows machine").
I adore the configurability of thunar/xfce's context menus - I have a bunch of custom actions available on different types of files, such as a "Play ISO as DVD" option which appears for iso files. All added via thunar's neat 'configure custom actions' GUI, no messing about with the registry or playing with arcane configuration files or hoping that the coder who wrote my DVD playing software chose to create an association for iso files.
Then there's the godawful command line interface in windows. It lacks so many features it's not even funny. Tabs - what are they? Hell, you can't even press the 'up' key to get access to commands from your previous session (i.e across reboots).
Or we could talk about configuring a webserver. That's a particularly fun one. For me, setting up an enterprise-grade web server requires me to type something like 'apt-get install apache2', then spending about 1 minute editing configuration to enable the site I want. For you, it involves purchasing the latest version of windows server, ensuring that you spent enough to have not run up against the arbitrary restrictions imposed on you ('number of simultaneous connections/users') and spending an hour and a half clicking through "wizards" which assume that you're too stupid to know what a webserver is (which is an interesting assumption, given that you've chosen to set up an enterprise-grade webserver). It's a similar situation for pretty much any other server software: "apt-get install postgresql" vs "purchase MSSQL, install MSSQL, configure MSSQL for an hour". Hell, the last time I used MSSQL it didn't even allow remote connections by default - "for security". Because apparently the idea of allowing remote connections except from the super user never occurred to anybody at microsoft.
I reiterate that these are all just off the top of my head - I haven't actually sat down and tried to create an exhaustive list, or anything. These are just a couple of big ones which immediately leap to mind. In reality the reasons Linux is better are the ten thousand little things that I just don't even notice anymore until they're not available on some other platform, when I start screaming.
None of those are reasons Linux is better on the desktop for the average consumer.
Linux has less than 2% desktop market share for a reason. That doesn't mean YOU can't like and use Linux, but don't confuse a techie's likes with the mass population.
If you like Linux, go ahead. Just don't have any delusions of grandeur that "The Year of the Linux Desktop" is near, because it isn't.
Re: (Score:2)
Another example, windows makes the assumption that I'm too stupid to know about the maximise button and helpfully maximises the window when I drag it to the top of the screen. Because there's no way I could possibly want a small window at the top of the screen.
I adore the configurability of thunar/xfce's context menus - I have a bunch of custom actions available on different types of files, such as a "Play ISO as DVD" option which appears for iso files. All added via thunar's neat 'configure custom actions' GUI, no messing about with the registry or playing with arcane configuration files or hoping that the coder who wrote my DVD playing software chose to create an association for iso files.
None of those are reasons Linux is better on the desktop for the average consumer.
Wow, you're not paying attention at all. See my reply above.