Curse

Nomax · May 01, 2007, 01:01 AM // 01:01

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dex

Sure, they don't always make the best decisions or produce the best products, but come on. The type of business they run is completely different from that run by Apple. It's like comparing Apples to......well......Windows....

I didn't say/mean Microsoft products are bad or have more problems than other. I just see how quickly their products get old and they're fully responsible of that. It's the main characteristics of their business model. They never adapt their legacy product for new technologies. They release something completely incompatible to make you switch to their new solution (MS-DOS > Windows 95 > Windows 98SE > Windows XP > Windows Vista). And if you don't do it quickly enough they kinda force you to do it (eg software that runs only on XP and not on 2000 while it doesn't require specific XP features, soon Vista only games that could run on XP). It's the way they chosen and I won't blame them for that. The goal of a company is to make money. But as an end-user, I feel like being their hostage (not to that point but...). Using Microsoft OS (and following them), is like paying a yearly subscribtion of $25. So I'm fed up to be the cash cow. Of course you don't have to always buy the latest Windows but you take the risk that the latest version of your favourite software won't work on your old OS or that your brand new peripheral won't connect to your PC because it's not beign recognized by your OS. The good point with Linux is that you can follow the evolution smoothly and freely (in both sense of the term) and that's priceless, because you can use the saved money to buy "useful" software and not just paying to stay up-to-date. This is not an universal truth, it's just how I see it.

But before they close the thread, we should get back to Guild Wars Linux client discussion.

Dex · May 01, 2007, 04:31 AM // 04:31

I just want to make a couple of statements on this and then I'll let it go.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nomax

I just see how quickly their products get old and they're fully responsible of that. It's the main characteristics of their business model. They never adapt their legacy product for new technologies. They release something completely incompatible to make you switch to their new solution (MS-DOS > Windows 95 > Windows 98SE > Windows XP > Windows Vista). And if you don't do it quickly enough they kinda force you to do it (eg software that runs only on XP and not on 2000 while it doesn't require specific XP features, soon Vista only games that could run on XP). It's the way they chosen and I won't blame them for that. The goal of a company is to make money.

The main technologies that "expire" as Windows versions progress are gaming technologies. 99.9% of all software that will run on Windows XP will also run on Windows '95. The move from MS-DOS to Windows '95 isn't a valid point...there's no way that any company would have tried to make MS-DOS and Windows compatible platforms. The main reason gaming technologies "expire" is because vendors stop making device drivers for newer hardware. How is that Microsoft's fault? Windows '95 goes all the way to DirectX 8 and Windows '98 can use DirectX 9...from where I'm standing Microsoft held up their end of the bargain. If the hardware and software vendors choose not to make their products compatible with older versions of Windows that isn't Microsoft's problem. Beyond that there are a few base infrastructure issues that cause incompatibilities with older versions, but all OSes have that. Yes, even MacOS has that. When that happens to something as complex as an OS sometimes patches and updates aren't enough. Sometimes the core of the system must be changed (trust me, I'm a software engineer...this happens when a system gets old enough and technologies change even if the system is designed well), and sometimes this can get really expensive. Not many companies are going to keep things like this up-to-date for free, and when your OS has hundreds, perhaps thousands of times the (desktop) installed-base as any other and you're responsible for keeping up with integrating a staggering number of 3rd-party technologies it becomes difficult to design the core of your system to handle everything. Apple is only able to do it a bit better because the number of 3rd-parties involved is extremely limited, and this is even more true for Linux. I actually find it pretty impressive that I know several people that are still quite happily running Windows '98 and don't feel limited by it.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nomax

Using Microsoft OS (and following them), is like paying a yearly subscribtion of $25. So I'm fed up to be the cash cow. Of course you don't have to always buy the latest Windows but you take the risk that the latest version of your favourite software won't work on your old OS or that your brand new peripheral won't connect to your PC because it's not beign recognized by your OS. The good point with Linux is that you can follow the evolution smoothly and freely (in both sense of the term) and that's priceless, because you can use the saved money to buy "useful" software and not just paying to stay up-to-date.

It sounds to me like you're saying you want a free OS. That's fine, but expecting every software company to spend money making a port for a free OS so you don't have to pay for one is like asking to "have your cake and eat it too," and that is seldom realistic. (Now back to the Linux subject) I'm willing to bet that if someone eventually creates an implementation of Linux that is full featured and vendor supported enough to compete with a commercial OS it's going to be created by an organized entity. An organized entity that is going to want money for all of the hours and hours of skilled labor that went into building it. I'm saying that it's no longer going to be free. There are a lot of dedicated engineers that contribute to making Linux the product that it is, but it's going to take a lot more work to make a truly commercial quality OS out of it. Something tells me that, as dedicated as the current community is, they neither have enough time nor are they organized enough to handle all of the work that's required to fill it out feature-wise as well as form standards and relationships that allow their product to integrate technologies from legions of 3rd-party vendors. It takes an entity as organized as a company to accomplish things like that, and companies tend to want to get paid because their employees need things like salaries, health care, etc. $25 per year for what is most likely the most complex piece of software on your system? I wouldn't call that a cash cow. People pay an average of $25-$50 per month for cable television.

Nomax · May 01, 2007, 10:36 AM // 10:36

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dex

I just want to make a couple of statements on this and then I'll let it go.

Well, I like this conversation, I find it interesting. Both sides have valid points so if it doesn't bother moderators...

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dex

The main technologies that "expire" as Windows versions progress are gaming technologies. 99.9% of all software that will run on Windows XP will also run on Windows '95. The move from MS-DOS to Windows '95 isn't a valid point...there's no way that any company would have tried to make MS-DOS and Windows compatible platforms.

Yes sorry. I just remember the hard time the transition was. When many of our DOS games crashed the brand new Windows 95 or just runned dead slow. Real pain!

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dex

The main reason gaming technologies "expire" is because vendors stop making device drivers for newer hardware. How is that Microsoft's fault? Windows '95 goes all the way to DirectX 8 and Windows '98 can use DirectX 9...from where I'm standing Microsoft held up their end of the bargain. If the hardware and software vendors choose not to make their products compatible with older versions of Windows that isn't Microsoft's problem. Beyond that there are a few base infrastructure issues that cause incompatibilities with older versions, but all OSes have that. Yes, even MacOS has that. When that happens to something as complex as an OS sometimes patches and updates aren't enough. Sometimes the core of the system must be changed (trust me, I'm a software engineer...this happens when a system gets old enough and technologies change even if the system is designed well), and sometimes this can get really expensive. Not many companies are going to keep things like this up-to-date for free, and when your OS has hundreds, perhaps thousands of times the (desktop) installed-base as any other and you're responsible for keeping up with integrating a staggering number of 3rd-party technologies it becomes difficult to design the core of your system to handle everything.

You're right about hardware support but software wise, we have seen XP software not compatible with Windows 2000 without any real reason (SoundForge, game upgrades for Tron 2, Unreal Tournaments). Strange...

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dex

I actually find it pretty impressive that I know several people that are still quite happily running Windows '98 and don't feel limited by it.

Yes, staying with Windows 98 is possible. My old PC is running Windows 98SE and is happy with it. Unfortunately, it can't install MS Internet Explorer 7 (which at last support PNG alpha-channel transparency) while Mozilla is talking about not supporting Win98 anymore, latest Photoshop and MS Office doesn't install on it... So it's fine but for how much time?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dex

It sounds to me like you're saying you want a free OS.

No, no, I just want something I pay only once for. That's why I chosen Guild Wars and not World of Warcraft.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dex

That's fine, but expecting every software company to spend money making a port for a free OS so you don't have to pay for one is like asking to "have your cake and eat it too," and that is seldom realistic.

No, I would pay for the software of course. Imagine, I don't buy Windows Vista, then I save $125 (that's the price of the 32-bit Home Basic OEM DVD in Belgium). With that money, I can buy the next 2 Guild Wars campaigns. Guess where I rather like to invest my money.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dex

(Now back to the Linux subject) I'm willing to bet that if someone eventually creates an implementation of Linux that is full featured and vendor supported enough to compete with a commercial OS it's going to be created by an organized entity. An organized entity that is going to want money for all of the hours and hours of skilled labor that went into building it. I'm saying that it's no longer going to be free. There are a lot of dedicated engineers that contribute to making Linux the product that it is, but it's going to take a lot more work to make a truly commercial quality OS out of it. Something tells me that, as dedicated as the current community is, they neither have enough time nor are they organized enough to handle all of the work that's required to fill it out feature-wise as well as form standards and relationships that allow their product to integrate technologies from legions of 3rd-party vendors. It takes an entity as organized as a company to accomplish things like that, and companies tend to want to get paid because their employees need things like salaries, health care, etc. $25 per year for what is most likely the most complex piece of software on your system? I wouldn't call that a cash cow. People pay an average of $25-$50 per month for cable television.

You're right, Linux community lacks organization and sometimes efforts are ruined by disputes on insignifiant details. But many companies live of Linux. Linux, unlike Windows is open. That means everybody can make its very own version of it that suits his needs.
And that's what happens. Many Linux companies sell custom servers assembled and especially configured to suit customer's need. So everybody is happy. Others are service only companies that provide extensive support. I worked at a video surveillance company and we were in business with a local Linux company, the service was really great. All our needs were fulfilled in no time. Now there's a subscribtion fee of course. But that's for companies, as non professionnal end-user I don't need that support (since I don't mind spending some times on community forums) and logically, I don't have to pay for that service.

Linux is doing great in the business world since it can be build for very specific task.
In Windows, lots of stuff you don't need are included for the sake of easiness. Personally, I'm not interested in losing gigas of disk space wasted by thousands of drivers I will never use. But as Microsoft is in dominant position, people get used to it. An d that's the problem: Nowadays, people are so used to the Microsoft way, that they feel lost in Linux.

Now Linux distributions like Ubuntu try to attract those people by "imitating" Windows behaviour. And that works for a moment unless you try to install some fancy software. Then the illusion doesn't long last.

But most of the problems you encounter are due to bad drivers, incompatible sotware, all things that could be avoided with better support from 3rd party companies. This can be achieved if all the big Linux vendors gather together to establish a standard way of working along with the community (RedHat, Novell, Sun, IBM, HP).
Linux is a great commercial OS for companies but not quite ready for today Microsoft PC users. But I think that's going to change. The biggest brake is people's closed mind (only the MS way exists).

Nothing prevent 3rd party developpers to make valuable Linux drivers for their products. It's not difficult since everything is well documented. And if everybody makes his own driver there's no problem. But you're right that it lacks a unique standard. Currently, everybody does what he want the way he wants. That's freedom but the drawback of freedom is anarchy. Fortunately, a few standards are dominant in the Linux world. And if some big vendors use these standards, others will follow.

In fact you can't compare Linux to Windows. The distribution model is different, the business model is different but you can build a successful business off Linux based solutions. It's just another way of doing business. But it's profitable.

Of course the current Linux user market share amongst consumers is not appealing to game companies (to say the least), but it's a new market. Now it's their time to lead the way and prospect this new business. I see that situation as exciting. If a game is planned as a cross-platform product from day one, its development wouldn't be higher. But it would reach more people. The money the user pays for Windows isn't going to software publishers pocket.

eremos · May 02, 2007, 10:40 PM // 22:40

Quote:

Originally Posted by Aecum

the real question about that would be "is a DX10 patch/upgrade for guildwars in the works?", it campaign 4 going to be DX10 ?

No and neither will GW2 (or at least it won't be required)

Dex · May 02, 2007, 11:28 PM // 23:28

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nomax

You're right about hardware support but software wise, we have seen XP software not compatible with Windows 2000 without any real reason (SoundForge, game upgrades for Tron 2, Unreal Tournaments). Strange...

That's true, but that isn't Microsoft's fault. If a company designs their software for Windows XP and doesn't bother to test and QA it with older versions of Windows that's the software vendor's fault, not Microsoft's. Now, if Microsoft released Windows XP and it caused Windows 2000 software to stop working (and it wasn't the result of poor device drivers, etc., for the new platform that are outside of MS's control), then that would be Microsoft's fault for not allowing for backward compatibility. This happens, but not terrbly often.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nomax

Yes, staying with Windows 98 is possible. My old PC is running Windows 98SE and is happy with it. Unfortunately, it can't install MS Internet Explorer 7 (which at last support PNG alpha-channel transparency) while Mozilla is talking about not supporting Win98 anymore, latest Photoshop and MS Office doesn't install on it... So it's fine but for how much time?

As I said, it's not unheard of for new features to be exposed in an OS that prevent a piece of software from being compatible with an older one. That is difficult to get around for any software company.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nomax

No, no, I just want something I pay only once for. That's why I chosen Guild Wars and not World of Warcraft.

That's fine, but software development and testing is very expensive. Better hope the company that makes the OS you paid for doesn't go out of business because they provide unlimited updates for free without releasing anything new to generate revenue (even ArenaNet does this). I just don't think that's realistic.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nomax

You're right, Linux community lacks organization and sometimes efforts are ruined by disputes on insignifiant details. But many companies live of Linux. Linux, unlike Windows is open. That means everybody can make its very own version of it that suits his needs.

Right, and that's why Linux is a niche product and probably will be until someone produces a "be all, end all" implementation of it.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nomax

Linux is doing great in the business world since it can be build for very specific task.
In Windows, lots of stuff you don't need are included for the sake of easiness. Personally, I'm not interested in losing gigas of disk space wasted by thousands of drivers I will never use. But as Microsoft is in dominant position, people get used to it. An d that's the problem: Nowadays, people are so used to the Microsoft way, that they feel lost in Linux.

Microsoft is giving the average end-user what they want in a way that Linux cannot unless someone creates a more "bloated" implementation of it. Again, Windows and Linux are working completely separate markets.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nomax

Now Linux distributions like Ubuntu try to attract those people by "imitating" Windows behaviour. And that works for a moment unless you try to install some fancy software. Then the illusion doesn't long last.

But most of the problems you encounter are due to bad drivers, incompatible sotware, all things that could be avoided with better support from 3rd party companies. This can be achieved if all the big Linux vendors gather together to establish a standard way of working along with the community (RedHat, Novell, Sun, IBM, HP).
Linux is a great commercial OS for companies but not quite ready for today Microsoft PC users. But I think that's going to change. The biggest brake is people's closed mind (only the MS way exists).

And once that happens you'll have to pay for that implementation. It'll end up being just like Windows. There's no "free lunch" here.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nomax

Nothing prevent 3rd party developpers to make valuable Linux drivers for their products. It's not difficult since everything is well documented. And if everybody makes his own driver there's no problem. But you're right that it lacks a unique standard. Currently, everybody does what he want the way he wants. That's freedom but the drawback of freedom is anarchy. Fortunately, a few standards are dominant in the Linux world. And if some big vendors use these standards, others will follow.

Nothing is really helping the developers for 3rd-party vendors justify the expense of creating these Linux drivers, either. Again I have to say the establishment of these standards, the development of these drivers, and the development, testing, and publication of these Linux implementations are going to cost a lot of money. There's no way that such a wonderful product is going to be offered up for free...not for long, anyway.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nomax

In fact you can't compare Linux to Windows. The distribution model is different, the business model is different but you can build a successful business off Linux based solutions. It's just another way of doing business. But it's profitable.

Exactly what I'm trying to say. They're different animals. If you try to make a Windows out of Linux it will stop being a free product. The process of making a good end-user Linux implementation will cost a lot of money and isn't likely to be possible coming from an open-source community. It's going to require a company to organize such an effort, and that company is going to charge you money for their product.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nomax

Of course the current Linux user market share amongst consumers is not appealing to game companies (to say the least), but it's a new market. Now it's their time to lead the way and prospect this new business. I see that situation as exciting. If a game is planned as a cross-platform product from day one, its development wouldn't be higher. But it would reach more people. The money the user pays for Windows isn't going to software publishers pocket.

My question is, "who is going to lead the way for Linux, and will they do it for free?" I think the answer is "no". Linux really isn't a new market. It's been around for quite some time, and it's never been able to evolve beyond a niche product because (I believe) that nobody is going to build the "Windows killer" implementation of it. If they do it's going to be very expensive to develop, and by the time it makes it to the shelves of your local software store with all of the features and end-user usability that Windows has it's going to have a $100 price tag on it.

That's just how I see it. I work in the software industry, and while I do use some open source products that are quite nice (.netTiers, NUnit, Subversion, etc.), they're all small-scale applications. The big stuff (like a full-featured, end-user OS) requires a lot more than a handful of programmers with some spare time to create and maintain. It requires a company, and most companies don't work for free.

Lucifer PVP · May 03, 2007, 01:44 PM // 13:44

i could care less if they support linux or not, opengl 2.0 support would be great but i am wishing a lot.

If you are having trouble installing guild wars on linux here is a thread
http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=283122
Guildwars runs very well in linux on the wine layer.

Dex with Dell in the near future offering Ubuntu who knows what is going to happen but you are right who is going to (for free) develop the windows killer
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/6610901.stm

Nomax · May 03, 2007, 03:39 PM // 15:39

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lucifer PVP

If you are having trouble installing guild wars on linux here is a thread
http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=283122
Guildwars runs very well in linux on the wine layer.

Thanks Lucifer!

I tried to run it through Wine during 2 days before posting here. Unfortunately, it ran only once and at 5fps. Then it crashed each time. I tried with installations done using the web client, from my original CDs and by copying the Guild Wars directory from my girlfriend's Windows XP installation. In all cases, it installs successfully but whan I run it, it looks like entering a loop where it's continuously loading data and that's all.

At this moment, I play Guild Wars on my girlfriend's laptop (she kindly lend it to me) but it's only a temporary solution.

FlameoutAlchemist · May 04, 2007, 02:05 PM // 14:05

Ugh...Thread necromancy. I hate it!

Be advised, depending on where this thread continues to go, it may be moved as it's not really a technical issue that we're talking about here.

Nomax · May 04, 2007, 02:46 PM // 14:46

Quote:

Originally Posted by FlameoutAlchemist

Be advised, depending on where this thread continues to go, it may be moved as it's not really a technical issue that we're talking about here.

"This game doesn't work." is a technical issue IMHO...

FlameoutAlchemist · May 04, 2007, 04:50 PM // 16:50

The thread is going borderline Win vs Linux.

Let's keep it on topic.

Lucifer PVP · May 04, 2007, 04:59 PM // 16:59

Useful switches for gw using Wine

-nosound to avoid FMOD problem. This disable sound engine where -mute only lowerise sound.

-dx7/8/9 (9 is default) to do DirectX regression test.

-diag to generate log about what's going wrong.

-repair to repair broken file. If you think you do have.

-noshaders to disable pixel and Vertic Shader's

-sndasio to enable audio using ASIO Audio Format

-image will download every files and decompress them. Huge use of CPU cycle - Warning.

-dsound

Registry tweaks:

[HKEY_CURRENT_USER\Software\Wine\Direct3D]
"DirectDrawRenderer"=""

gdi - Use GDI to draw on the screen (slow but reliable) (default)

opengl - Use OpenGL (fast but not all programs work correctly)]

"OffscreenRenderingMode"=""

backbuffer: the rendering is done in the backbuffer (default)
pbuffer: uses PixelBuffers
fbo: uses Framebuffer object

"PixelShaderMode"=""

"RenderTargetLockMode"=""

auto: same as readdraw at the moment, will do benchmarks and use best method later(default)
disabled: effectively disables render target locking
readdraw: uses glReadPixels for reading, glDrawPixels for drawing
readtex: reading with glReadPixels, drawing by drawing a textured quad
texdraw: readback using a texture, drawing with glDrawPixels
textex: readback using a texture, drawing with a textured quad]

"UseGLSL"=""

[When set to "enabled", this enables the use of GL Shading Language for vertex
and pixel shaders, as long as the hardware supports it. This is experimental
at the moment, and not fully implemented.]

"VertexShaderMode"=""

"VideoMemorySize"=""

[Sets the amount of emulated video memory. Default is 64 (that results in 64MB),
in the future some automatic ways to obtain the real value should be added.]

http://appdb.winehq.org/appview.php?...estingId=11123

http://wiki.winehq.org/UsefulRegistryKeys

Nomax · May 04, 2007, 05:43 PM // 17:43

Quote:

Originally Posted by FlameoutAlchemist

The thread is going borderline Win vs Linux.

Sorry, it was not my goal. I just tried to give my opinion about why it would be a good idea to make a Linux version. I didn't say anything like that one OS is bad and the other one is good.

Thanks Lucifer PVP, I'll try with these settings!

Lucifer PVP · May 04, 2007, 05:48 PM // 17:48

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nomax

Sorry, it was not my goal. I just tried to give my opinion about why it would be a good idea to make a Linux version. I didn't say anything like that one OS is bad and the other one is good.

Thanks Lucifer PVP, I'll try with these settings!

I don't know if you had any issues with video drivers but ill post up this application for others that would like to try out linux and gw. it is for ubuntu 6-7.04 and it may work on some other deb based systems it install the graphic drivers so you don''t have to.

http://www.albertomilone.com/nvidia_scripts1.html

graphic drivers in linux can be a real pain in the ass to configure correctly so if you haven't install the drivers yet use this persons script. Learned that when i installed beryl.. which a little off subject the best eye candy i have ever seen in an OS and will run on most old machines just fine .. quite amazing .

Dex · May 04, 2007, 10:57 PM // 22:57

Quote:

Originally Posted by FlameoutAlchemist

The thread is going borderline Win vs Linux.

Let's keep it on topic.

That wasn't my intention either. In my opinion there is no point in arguing Linux vs. Windows. They fill two completely different niches and have their individual strengths and weaknesses. I was just trying to express why I don't believe it's realistic to expect Linux ports of games...mainly because it isn't financially viable or a wise use of resources for most game software companies. In that sense I think our exchange was on-topic.