Spring RTS Engine

Caydr wrote:Windows is good enough for me.

Its also good enough for my cat.

Caydr wrote:I admit I've never tried it

And btw, ALL Debian packages are compatible with Ubuntu, at least to the extent which a windows user will be trying to use linux for. Really, at least stop contradicting yourself.

And I would suggest the recent part of this thread to be split into an "OS flamewar" thread, rather than ATI vid discussion.


And Caydr, you will be surprised how many more people use linux than you could imagine. even just google OLPC programme, and think what system will those people be used to in the future.

I made up the specific compatibility problems and I thought invoking Hitler would make that clear. I was just picking names out of my nose, I have no recollection of what specifically didn't work with what.

I've been made aware recently that not everyone here understands English with the pristine and, if you will, utterly magnificent, level of comprehension that I do. So I will give you a pro tip: If someone alleges that something is in fact the work of Hitler, they are probably knowingly exaggerating to some extent so you should re-read the paragraph, asking yourself, "At what point does this post devolve into self-parody?" and stop paying attention at least two sentences before that.

This OS "flamewar" if you want to call it that is based on two things: people being unhappy that ATI doesn't prioritize support a non-gamer platform, and my introducing said people's e-asses to the merciless unreality of my e-foot.

Once again: Linux is great for all sorts of things that aren't gaming. I realize this and if I was running a web server I wouldn't run it on Windows. If I was doing anything at all that didn't involve frequent trips to fantasy worlds filled with guns, pirates, and mayhem, I wouldn't use Windows. However, the reality is that I don't see myself dual-booting just so that the free equivalent of Word is 0.3% more stable on the off chance that I decide to do something productive with my time.

ATI is not a charity, they need to decide between:
A) Remaining unprofitable, in second place but having good support for an OS almost nobody uses, relatively speaking, and which absolutely nobody uses as a dedicated gaming platform
B) Taking a shot at first place and the magical world of not being on the road to bankruptcy, but also not being wasteful with their limited financial resources.

Maybe you don't realize this, but ATI hasn't turned a profit in like two years. Goodwill towards the hardcore geek community that results in practical benefits for nobody isn't in their short list for ways to solve that problem.

Auswaschbar wrote:

Caydr wrote:Windows is good enough for me.

Its also good enough for my cat.

My cat likes windows too, let's cuddle.

smoth wrote:

Master-Athmos wrote:Linux is a perfect OS and in the end superior to Windows.

no

Seconded. Linux is FAR from perfect, even for an advanced user.

I'll give you one all encompassing reason that linux is far from perfect:

"SUDO"

If I want to fuck with command line to handle basic and routine tasks, I'll install MSDOS 6.2.

Moreover, whoever designed the ui for ubuntu and kububtu should be lined up and systematically shot, survivors should be shot again... Rinse and repeat.

Windows7 UI fully trumps linux and mac's best offerings, and raises them 5 usabilities.

There is a reason so many people use windows, and it's not because they're all noobs. Linux users suffer from the same syndrome as mac users, and that is the fact that most linux users are unable to pull their noses out of the air long enough to have a decent conversation.

Small list of problems with ubuntu right out of the gate...

Crap driver support:
My keyboard. I can plug any keyboard into a windows machine and the volume wheel will work without a hitch within 2 - 5 seconds. In ubuntu, it didn't work at all right off the bat.

The volume panel, labeled mysteriously "CS101", with 25 volume sliders, 10 of which my card doesn't even support. Wave wasn't marked, master wasn't marked, etc. So I had to fiddle with each one to figure out WTF each one was. Last time I checked, I can buy any sound card on the market and when windows boots up, it will "just work". Last time I checked, a sound blaster audigy isn't exactly an obscure sound board. Also the ui for the sound panel is fucking retarded, but I'll let that one slide for a bit (you have to use the ui to make the volume wheel work, which btw was a bitch and a half).

Sound not working with WINE. Yeah whatever, gee, I love using the command line in linux, it makes me feel SO SUPERIOR!

Network card... Now why in the hell does my wireless work, but the plug in doesn't?

I STILL have to install obscure nvidia drivers... It doesn't help that there are no less than 5 "programs?" "Driver Installs"? "???" for nvidia that do the same thing in different ways and may or may not work...

Did I mention command line?

Oh and also there is the issue that you need to use the command line, OFTEN.

Oh yeah, I forgot to mention having to go to the command line to perform simple tasks.

Synopsis:
Developers suck at designing User Interfaces.

Linux is far from a superior usability OS. If linux were actually useable by common mortals, then it would have a bigger market share. But it isn't, so it doesn't.

READ THIS PART BEFORE HITTING THE REPLY BUTTON LINUX PEOPLE!

Yes I know well how to fix all the above things I listed, but my mother wouldn't, nor would my grandmother, but neither of them have any trouble understanding and using windows7.

Long story short, win7 kicks the living shit out of anything else on the market.

I've got an Ubuntu partition on this machine.

It's better than I expected, but still worse than you need for the desktop. On the plus side, I've never had to use the command-line. On the minus side, it has many, many, many niggling usability issues that Windows had solved a decade ago - like the Common Dialog Box in Gnome has always been utterly pathetic.

Forboding Angel wrote:Did I mention command line?

Oh and also there is the issue that you need to use the command line, OFTEN.

Oh yeah, I forgot to mention having to go to the command line to perform simple tasks.

I find it amusing that some common windows users download and install that many obscure tools for tasks solvable by 1 or 2 lines of bash.

Forboding Angel wrote:Yes I know well how to fix all the above things I listed, but my mother wouldn't, nor would my grandmother, but neither of them have any trouble understanding and using windows7.

Long story short, win7 kicks the living shit out of anything else on the market.

Because everyone using a pc has the same preferences and needs as your mother and grandmother.

I'm talking about common useability Aus. Nerds can always find a way to do what they want, but your mother and grandmother are perfect examples of the massive majority of computer users in the world.

My 92 year old grandfather has absolutely no problem negotiating the landscape of vista, and even understand how to watch movie torrents that I have via network.

He also LOVES facebook, which jsut cracks me up to no end

I find it amusing that some common windows users download and install that many obscure tools for tasks solvable by 1 or 2 lines of bash.

No... In most cases, things like that are built into the windows program ui... Like automatically updating for example.

As cool as "sudo apt update" is? I think I'll pass

Linux and ubuntu has amazing potential, but you guys first need to line up and shoot your current ui designers first.

Like I said, I never had to touch the command-line in Ubuntu.

When people on forums say "sudo apt update", its' because they're old-guard geeks who use that method becuase it's faster than going through the GUI. Not because the GUI doesn't exist.

Pxtl wrote: When people on forums say "sudo apt update", its' because they're old-guard geeks who use that method becuase it's faster than going through the GUI. Not because the GUI doesn't exist.

nope, it's because it's way easier to give a short sentence to copypaste in a terminal than write 5-6 sentences to describe the procedures to reach the update icon, select updates, apply, etc

@Forb:
You're totally missing the point. With Linux you get low level access to ... well I'd say anything your computer can do. As that's tons of stuff you have to have a huge knowledge in order to make good use of all that which needs effort in order to learn things. Nobody says that this is easy but if you have to understand how a computer works / how to give it low level commands - it's as simple as that. That's why Linux is such a good operating system as it actually is about letting you operate whatever there is...

Nobody says though that this "level of detail" is needed for the average user which is where Windows comes in. As I said it's the way to go for such a case as it's focused around a nice GUI giving you at least access to some basic functionalities. It simply is unable to do all the low level stuff Linux offers you which is okay though as it's designed that way. It's a very good way to "use" your computer in a "productive way" without knowing too much technical stuff. At the same time it limits the possibilities of "what you can do with your computer" making it the inferior OS. Way nicer to use / learn but bad in actually letting you use what your hardware offers you...

So if you moan about the command line & stuff being extremely "uncomfortable" to phrase is nicely then yes - you're correct. In order to use that you have to have a quite in-depth understanding of lots and lots of technical stuff. If you really want to control your computer that's needed / handy though. If you don't need such things - well you should go for something way more "leightweight" with a real UI like all those numerous Linux distributions which added in some slick interface or go for Windows, Mac & whatever else is there. As imo the current Linux distributions still need too much technical knowledge nowadays Windows is the best choice in this case...

No, athmos, you're missing the point.

Master-Athmos wrote:@Forb:
You're totally missing the point. With Linux you get low level access to ... well I'd say anything your computer can do. As that's tons of stuff you have to have a huge knowledge in order to make good use of all that which needs effort in order to learn things. Nobody says that this is easy but if you have to understand how a computer works / how to give it low level commands - it's as simple as that. That's why Linux is such a good operating system as it actually is about letting you operate whatever there is...

And this is why linux enjoys such a low market share.

Which was my entire point to begin with. I myself can use linux just fine. Took all of a day to get most of the essentials down, but normal computer users don't need all of what you're so proud of, which wedges linux firmly in the niche of "Hobbyist OS" or "hardcore developer OS".

Edit: Wait, how did your first paragraph so completely miss the point of my post, then in the last paragraph it mildly addresses it?

Forboding Angel wrote:I'm talking about common useability Aus. Nerds can always find a way to do what they want, but your mother and grandmother are perfect examples of the massive majority of computer users in the world.

Actually, no. Not my mother, and definitely not my grandmother can get along with computers very well. I don't count the hours I spend fixing other peoples windowses.
Windows doesn't make computers magically easy to use. Imho the most important reason why people think windows is really easier to use is because they
a) got used to it (and its quirks and glitches)
b) there is usually some guy around to ask (strangely, most people find that easier than to ask google)

Forboding Angel wrote:

I find it amusing that some common windows users download and install that many obscure tools for tasks solvable by 1 or 2 lines of bash.

No... In most cases, things like that are built into the windows program ui... Like automatically updating for example.

As cool as "sudo apt update" is? I think I'll pass

No, that wasn't what I had in mind. I am talking about tasks you don't do as often. Partitioning an usb stick, ripping a dvd to the hdd, preparing videos for my portable player, basically, doing X for a subset of files scattered across my hdd.

Also, lets now talk about the epicness of the windows console and bash scripting. Did they make the console finally resizable in win7?

Forboding Angel wrote:Linux and ubuntu has amazing potential, but you guys first need to line up and shoot your current ui designers first.

I find functionality and ease of use (from my pov, yes, for me linux is easier to use than windows) more important than UI. Strangely, I found otu that most of the Apps I used back when I still booted windows regularrily have almost the same UI on windows and linux (firefox, vlc, gimp...).

Master-Athmos:
I find it insulting that a lot of linux people such as yourself use the argument that windows users are not technically apt. I use windows, do you want to say that I know nothing of computers? It is a ridiculous argument.

That sort of elitism about low-level control over a pc is asinine. It does not make one ignorant or stupid to want to use high level functionality. If it did, all programmers would write in strict machine op codes and not use languages like C++. Higher level functionality is not about someone being stupid, it is about saving time.

So drop the "I am smarter than you" argument.

Auswaschbar wrote:I find functionality and ease of use (from my pov, yes, for me linux is easier to use than windows) more important than UI. Strangely, I found otu that most of the Apps I used back when I still booted windows regularrily have almost the same UI on windows and linux (firefox, vlc, gimp...).

I'm talking about the OS ui, not individual 3rd party programs.

Edit: @smoth, +1

Auswaschbar wrote: a) got used to it (and its quirks and glitches)
b) there is usually some guy around to ask (strangely, most people find that easier than to ask google)

The same could be said of linux users, using linux isn't hard but it takes getting used to.

Auswaschbar wrote:b) there is usually some guy around to ask (strangely, most people find that easier than to ask google)

linux is not as popular in america, which means that most users have to use google as that guy isn't there to teach them to use it.

Forboding Angel wrote:I'm talking about the OS ui, not individual 3rd party programs.

How often do you use your OS ui? For me, that is less than 10% of the time I use my comp.

smoth wrote:

Auswaschbar wrote: a) got used to it (and its quirks and glitches)
b) there is usually some guy around to ask (strangely, most people find that easier than to ask google)

The same could be said of linux users, using linux isn't hard but it takes getting used to.

Yes, thats my point, exactly.

My only issue is that linux would not necessarily run all my tools and I was a .net developer, probably still going to do .net when I go back to work.

Forboding Angel wrote:And this is why linux enjoys such a low market share.

What low market share are you talking about? Standard home desktop PCs? Of course it's low there as it's pure logic: As I told in detail Linux imo currently makes no good OS for the average Joe and I don't see it going that way anytime soon. Linux has high market shares though in markets where all the low level stuff advantages are needed. For example have a look at supercomputers - the Linux market share is like 90% here and Windows just a tiny 1%:
http://www.top500.org/stats/list/33/osfam

The same goes for other mainframes & clusters (although I don't know any numbers there) - Linux really isn't something negigible there...

Forboding Angel wrote:but normal computer users don't need all of what you're so proud of,

Did you actually read my posts? 100% and exactly what I say...

smoth wrote:Master-Athmos:
I find it insulting that a lot of linux people such as yourself use the argument that windows users are not technically apt. I use windows, do you want to say that I know nothing of computers? It is a ridiculous argument.

That sort of elitism about low-level control over a pc is asinine. It does not make one ignorant or stupid to want to use high level functionality. If it did, all programmers would write in strict machine op codes and not use languages like C++. Higher level functionality is not about someone being stupid, it is about saving time.

So drop the "I am smarter than you" argument.

Sorry smoth but you're utterly wrong (and I probably won't be able to describe to what extent). Thanks for making one of the "linux people" out of me but as said you couldn't be more wrong...

I wouldn't go so far and say I "hate" Linux but I wouldn't feel bad if I would be able to touch it as rarely as possible. That's simply because understanding the depths of computing really isn't in my interest and as I don't plan on using any of such features I'm glad if there is a nice GUI giving me access to the basic things. I had some hopes for all those distributions floating around nowadays and it sort of was pretty good but once in a while you still come to a point when you are faced with things where you just wish for an installer / updater or anything else to do the work for you...

So smoth none of my posts involve either "low level elitism" or a "I am smarter than you" argument. It's simply a matter of fact though that Linux offers you more access to the computer's functions than Windows does making it the superior OS (as it's about operating the system). That's fine for me and I find it terrific when you actually watch someone who knows what he's doing under such conditions but I'm "totally satisfied" with a nice GUI that gives me eveything I need to "use" my computer in a productive way rather than "educate" it...

Oh btw:
My grandparents use linux and are totally satisfied with it (in their navi).
My parents use linux and are totally satisfied with it (in their router).

there are advantages to higher level operating systems. .Net development can get pretty in depth. I am still learning all the crap I can play with in it.