Discussion in 'Other Operating Systems' started by tr3nton, Jun 27, 2012.
An angry bird?
Everyone knows that pc gamers make up 98.9895% of all computers in existence, ever.
Actually I don't know many people that is cool with it. I can't stand it, non technical people I know don't like it either. Then they ask me which Windows version they should get because they have no idea, even though I'm not interested in remembering the differences. So i disagree having 101 different desktop Linux distros is a really bad joke. It's not survival of the fittest, its usually the case of which is least mediocre. MacOSX has got it right in this regard, just make one desktop version and do it really well.
And yet, by the end of this calendar year there will be more systems shipping with Ubuntu pre-installed than there will be with MacOSX pre-installed.
How much relevance in there comparing shipping volumes of a free and a propriety OS? The free OS is shipped on ubiquitous PCs, while Macs are a niche.
The argument was that if Linux was to reduce the amount distro's available it would become more popular, when it comes to popularity Ubuntu/linux/gnu will be shipping on more units than mac. So what's the point?
I find this funny considering the 'time bug' a whole crapton of RHEL servers just got hit by. And Linux on desktop? Next joke.
Having seen Linux use increase at a rate far lower than I feel it should be, and working with a range of people (some of them borderline human), I reckon I have it figured out.
To make a killer blow to the Windows server world, which still has a HUGE market share of typical business servers (AD, file-serving, exchange primarily), Linux needs to make a significant impact in the desktop world.
Unfortunately I think that a gaming argument is legit. A heap of people in IT are or were at one stage big gamers, and people have a tendency to stick to what they know. So long as Linux isn't a viable option for popular games it will not be used by your average teenage nerd, who make up a large chunk of future sys admins. For the record I'm not much of a gamer myself so it has minimal impact on me directly.
Based on my bold theory, I think Linux has a fair way to go. There's the nvidia driver issue (lets not go there in this thread), the directx situation, and the fact that game makers are probably struggling to justify supporting even the most popular PC OS as it is (rather than consoles), let alone Linux.
*waits for theory to be ripped apart*
This statistic isn't an indication of the quality of an OS. Else we should all stand back in awe of Windows awesomeness.
Still im a bit skeptical whether Ubuntu will out ship macOSX by the end of the year. So many people are running macs these days, you see it everywhere. I barely ever see people running ubuntu on their laptops.
Just a guess, businesses buying Dells etc with the Ubuntu option because they already have Windows licenses sorted. It's a bit of a dud statistic. Many would get the OS charge removed and just get the usual Windows option, others probably don't bother and just buy the Ubuntu systems.
This would be because it is not available in Australia OEM but in US and third world countrys, it is gaining momentum, Like India and how big is there population?? And china has a big Nix following aswell.
Definitely. And I have but one rebuttal.
This is guaranteed to be a massive, massive game changer.
You still need to overcome the DirectX argument though. I agree, this could be the start of something beautiful though. I've always thought that once Graphics Hypervisors become more prevalent, with decent enough passthru this argument could become moot (with the exception of course of still needing to have windows installed somewhere).
Steam going linux is a step in the right direction, but it's by no means the solution.
Steam doesn't run all games, do even all games on Steam support linux?
And for me personally, Steam doesn't have any of the games I play.
OpenGL is being used more and more, especially by those that want cross-platform interoperability. It's only going to get better with time.
Steam on linux isn't a fucking gamechanger - it's not like the games will be compatible magically because Steam is on linux. Steam is on OSX and the games range is piss poor compared to Windows.
Dont know where this idea that all major banks are increasing AIX deployments ahead of Linux.
I work for the CBA and have deployed more than a 1000 RHEL instances in the last 12 months. They have gone from a primarily Mainframe/Windows setup to deploying nearly 50% of their servers on RHEL. Certainly the roadmap is to migrate as much as they can from the Mainframe/Unix world into the midrange in house cloud solutions.
We are even starting to deploy RHEL in AWS to give you some idea of how prevasive it is becoming! Traditional Windows deployments of ISI, WebSphere etc are moving quickly to Linux as they take advantage of lower running costs.
When the Godfather of fps gaming says directx is better then opengl, you have an issue.
Perhaps not. But a reliable and trustworthy distribution platform makes a massive difference. Valve themselves have proved this under Windows, and have shown what a catalyst it has for attracting developers.
A very large portion of indie titles are already available for linux system (such as pretty well every "indie bundle" title) and even a few mainstream games. This is only going to increase over time once a distribution platform is available.
Apples and oranges. OSX is a niche market restricted to specific hardware. Linux is available on most (all) hardware devices already running windows. You can't just decide to install OSX cause you prefer it for everything except gaming. You can, however, do so for linux. To begin with, the majority (all?) games on Mac Steam should be very easily made available under Linux.
You've only to look at humble bundle statistics as an example of linux users' interest. Generally comparable to Mac sales numbers, but at a higher average price.
And with user interest comes developer interest. Something I feel was probably overestimated for OSX compared to Linux.
Didn't say it was better. Said it was being used more and more. And it is. Hell Carmack's ID released OpenGL based Rage not 6 months after that article. I think it does have some massive issues, but I don't think that is going to stop development with it.
Add to that you've got a lot of smaller developers emerging in the mobile markets writing games using OpenGLES, which is (obviously) much closer to OpenGL than DirectX.
Actually, it is. An untapped market where EA and Activision don't give a crap for. Only indie devs care...Its a ripe market for the taking.
The previous attempt was Loki Entertainment Software. They didn't write games themselves. They acted like a contractor to port existing games to Linux.
Id Software pushed their own titles. They didn't do online distribution. (And it looks like from "Rage" onwards, they aren't supporting Linux. This is because Timothee Besset, the guy responsible for all of Id's ports to Linux, has left and joined Frozen Sand...Working on "Urban Terror HD".)
This time, its different...
Valve does both games and online distribution. It is a long established company. That means they can provide both example/experience as well as an avenue for developers to get into the Linux gaming market. They can answer questions and concerns game devs have about supporting Linux.
Of course games need to be ported over, what kind of argument is that?
Linux is an untapped market with an audience that actually wants to game...The kind of people that would leave Windows, if their games ran on Linux with minimal issues. (If one had the choice of buying a new version of OS every few years vs simply downloading a new version for free, it'll be a no-brainer which they would adopt IF the applications they need to use are supported.)
You don't really have that market on the Apple side...Mainly because one would have to ditch their existing PC hardware and accept what Apple offers in their range. Apple seems more happy to promote their App Store with music, movies, etc. A distribution system where they own, control, and profit from.
...There's no such thing like that on Linux. There is no centralised standard market/store for all popular distros, as each distro project is responsible for their own distribution via repositories. (Canonical has made attempts with limited success for Ubuntu. Mainly because no major players have bothered in a big way.)
Meanwhile, Gabe Newell Showing Valve On Linux To Partners
...He's encouraging other developers to take a look at Linux by demonstrating what his company has done and why they're doing it. To lead by example with Steam client and L4D2 on Linux.
Its funny how my very simple statement mentioned nothing about primary apps or whether its being deployed ahead of Linux. Do people just fail at reading?
But in response to mwil7034, maybe its just 3 of the big 4 if you say there is no AIX at CBA.