[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Loki...


Am Don, 2002-01-24 um 23.40 schrieb Steve Baker:
> Marcus Ilgner wrote:
> > I don't know if we really only need full-scale commercial games for
> > linux to attract hard-core gamers. I can imagine a lot of them being
> > scared away if they have to recompile the kernel just to have support
> > for joystick xy.
> If you have to recompile your kernel to enable joysticks, you need to
> get a better distro!
> I use joysticks all the time and I've certainly never recompiled the
> kernel!  That's why we have 'insmod'.
Ok, I have to admit that my Debian system isn't perfectly fit for gamers :) But when
a new kernel gets released (with support for new hardware, those guys often have very
exotic configurations (e.g. force feedback)), they will probably want to
compile and install it and this step seems too complicated to me.
> The whole installation/admin thing is largely solved these days...
But only largely. I don't know Redhats or Mandrakes setup system, but
SuSE's Yast2 is imho still "ants in the pants" compared to other OS's
(btw: I really liked the setup of QNX).
> but what's really needed is computer manufacturers to pre-install Linux.
> There is some hope that this may start to happen if Microsoft are
> prohibited from banning the manufacturers from doing that (as they
> currently do).
Yes, that would be a really cool. I'm not really sure but I think that,
1 or 2 years ago, Vobis used to offer Linux with new computers. (If you
don't know Vobis: it's a rather large vendor here in Germany).
If they would do that today with one of the popular distros (SuSE,
Redhat) that could really be a success.
> > So the installation and administration will need to be
> > simpler, too. My point is, that it's not only the game developer's task
> > to "save linux on the desktop".
> Well, I think if this had come up a year or two ago, I'd have agreed with
> you - but everyone is now *VERY* sensitive to this issue and ease of
> setup is *THE* major selling point of the distro guys.
> > And then there's the issue, that those gamers, who succeded in setting
> > everything up, will want to play their games together with their friends
> > who still use Windoze, so you would also have to add "&& win" to "free
> > && great && linux".
> Well, most Linux games port pretty well onto Windoze - all of mine were
> running under windoze within a week of the Linux version going out the
> door.  I don't think that's a biggie.
Linux -> Windows isn't that difficult, that's true. But I don't know which
gamedev-company out there would restructure their development process to use the
proper architecture / APIs for development on both OSes. (this means
primarily not to use DirectX throughout the code)
> > Besides that, I'm still not 100% convinced, if Linux was ever meant to
> > be a desktop system. It's design is still very server-oriented... But
> > that's another question, which is a bit offtopic ;)
> I use (and have always used) Linux as a desktop system...I don't see
> anything especially "server-oriented" about it.  Come to think of it,
> I can't think of anything that would be good for a server that wouldn't
> also be good for a desktop system.
<OT>I don't want to deny that desktop systems can't use the benifits of
the underlying architecture. But the process of transforming linux into
a desktop system is still very young. Projects like KDE or GNOME have
just recently begun developing and now they're the only reason why
someone would want to use Linux on the desktop. I'm here speaking in
terms of productivity, not of money. I don't think that afterstep is
easier to use than e.g. Windows XP :)</OT>


PGP signature