locallyunsceneFeeder of TrollsJoin Date: 2002-12-25Member: 11528Members, Constellation
<!--quoteo(post=1718552:date=Jul 21 2009, 07:07 PM:name=Tesseract)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Tesseract @ Jul 21 2009, 07:07 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1718552"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Frankly you have yet to tell me why the technical side of Microsoft's software is bad. DirectX? The Windows API? .NET? Come on, I'm open to your debates here but don't just go "lol M$ r teh evul." You can be evil and a genius, you know. PROVE to me that their software is bad. I'm asking you to. Don't just whine that they're mean. <b>Talk about their actual products</b>.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> This is just silly. I could talk about how most distros run better on lower end machines or how the permissions system on more distros is better and show bench marks and case studies, but most users don't care about that stuff. To them "better technically" means "prettier UI".
And it's not about them being "mean" or "evul", it's about stagnating the browser market for 5 years through anti-trust practices. It's about running campaigns that literally spread lies about competitors, and using shills to do it. Astroturfing is not just "mean", it's also illegal and for good reasons.
And all of this is part of their "actual products". If you're just a home desktop user, I can see why this stuff wouldn't matter much to you. It's similar to how people buy GAP and other sweatshop products.
If you're a small business owner though, this stuff along with worrying about licensing closed-source software, and getting locked in.
Personally, I care about the benchmarks. However, as locallyunscene points out, it really depends a lot on your priorities, hardware, usage, philosophy (lol emacs versus vim), etc.
<!--quoteo(post=1716495:date=Jul 9 2009, 07:19 AM:name=Thaldarin)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Thaldarin @ Jul 9 2009, 07:19 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1716495"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->I thought Windows Server operates were just as serious. Otherwise my line between reality and imagination is screwed up?<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I know that, but to give you an example, google use linux in their dedicated servers. Not only google, wikipedia, sourceforge, slashdot and many other "well known" websites uses linux (or a unix variant) in their servers.
The same thing apply to HLDS, acording to game-monitor . com, actually there are 66105 hlds servers in linux, and 33160 in windows environments, 200% more.
So your line between reality and imagination is not totally screwed up, just a little bit :P
<!--quoteo(post=1718591:date=Jul 22 2009, 05:05 AM:name=ebrainte)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (ebrainte @ Jul 22 2009, 05:05 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1718591"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->I know that, but to give you an example, google use linux in their dedicated servers. Not only google, wikipedia, sourceforge, slashdot and many other "well known" websites uses linux (or a unix variant) in their servers.
The same thing apply to HLDS, acording to game-monitor . com, actually there are 66105 hlds servers in linux, and 33160 in windows environments, 200% more.
So your line between reality and imagination is not totally screwed up, just a little bit :P<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Not at all, windows operators are just as serious as linux operators as first said. Half-Life based games do run better on a linux machine there is no doubt about that, however not all games do, some restrictions on games can cause them to be Windows server based only. NS2 is a game it is not based on a Half-Life/Source engine, so until we see a server for windows & linux, no one can judge or tell.
<!--quoteo(post=1718577:date=Jul 22 2009, 03:15 AM:name=locallyunscene)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (locallyunscene @ Jul 22 2009, 03:15 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1718577"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->This is just silly. I could talk about how most distros run better on lower end machines or how the permissions system on more distros is better and show bench marks and case studies, but most users don't care about that stuff. To them "better technically" means "prettier UI".<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> Logical fallacy: ad hominem. You're saying Windows is bad because <b><i>I</i></b> apparently only care about the visual elements of an operating system. And if you could talk about it then <b>do it</b>. If you're going to claim something, then be aware that proof by assertion is also a logical fallacy. I'm being open here, please prove to me that Microsoft technologies are 'bad' or 'redundant.'
<!--quoteo(post=1718577:date=Jul 22 2009, 03:15 AM:name=locallyunscene)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (locallyunscene @ Jul 22 2009, 03:15 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1718577"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->And it's not about them being "mean" or "evul", it's about stagnating the browser market for 5 years through anti-trust practices.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> I <b>said</b> in my previous post that I am aware of the Browser Wars, and I don't advocate all their practices there, but hey, Firefox is doing well for itself, as is Safari. Also for a company that are trying to dominate the market how come Microsoft backed out of IE for the Mac and <a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20080106181017/http://www.microsoft.com/mac/products/internetexplorer/internetexplorer.aspx?pid=internetexplorer" target="_blank">recommended Apple's Safari</a>? Is this part of their 'evil scheme'? Advising people to use a competitor's browser? How evil!
<!--quoteo(post=1718577:date=Jul 22 2009, 03:15 AM:name=locallyunscene)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (locallyunscene @ Jul 22 2009, 03:15 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1718577"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->It's about running campaigns that literally spread lies about competitors, and using shills to do it. Astroturfing is not just "mean", it's also illegal and for good reasons.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->Since when has it been illegal? Not that it's a respectable campaign, but hey, I'm not the one yelling "Microsoft's software is bad" without actually backing it up with empirical data.
<!--quoteo(post=1718577:date=Jul 22 2009, 03:15 AM:name=locallyunscene)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (locallyunscene @ Jul 22 2009, 03:15 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1718577"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->And all of this is part of their "actual products". If you're just a home desktop user, I can see why this stuff wouldn't matter much to you. It's similar to how people buy GAP and other sweatshop products.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->Again with the ad hominem, "oh you <b>must</b> be a home desktop user, so you're wrong because you are." This is wrong, anyway, I am not <b>just</b> some 'casual computer user,' although for casual computer usage I use Windows, yes, but when I run servers it's Linux (Gentoo and Fedora, if you're wondering) so grow up and stop accusing me of being some Windows-only gamer-only user. If you can't give any better arguments (see: ones that aren't logically fallacious) then don't resort to throwing an incorrect insult at me, yeesh.
People you're really reading me wrong here, I'm asking "what's wrong with the Windows API/DirectX/.NET" and I'm getting, "OMG BLIND MICRO$$$$OFT FANBOI OMGGGGGGGG LERN2LINUX THEN TALK" and frankly this is my problem with the Linux community. You can't have a decent debate about proprietary software without them leaping to arms and declaring how closed-source is bad because it's bad and evil and OMG MICROSOFT and all this. Stop going off like a mousetrap about this stuff and for the love of Christ <b>shut up about the browser wars</b>. If you want to argue about something being 'redundant' then referencing that damn piece of history certainly counts as it. Especially as in the modern day there's Firefox, Opera, Safari and Chrome, all of which are doing all right for themselves. I have yet to see any of them be bought out by Microsoft, or crushed by Microsoft.
Please come back to the point I've been repeatedly asking but getting no response to: "what's wrong with the Windows API/DirectX/.NET?" And the next person to mention Microsoft's business practices or the browser wars could you kindly unregister from these forums because this is really only for people who are capable of reading English or who understand English when it is read to them (text-to-speech or someone nearby). Remember I want someone to prove the stuff is bad; this is not me trying to prove it's good. Stop assuming I'm out to get you people, I just want some irreputable facts. TIA
locallyunsceneFeeder of TrollsJoin Date: 2002-12-25Member: 11528Members, Constellation
<!--quoteo(post=1718638:date=Jul 22 2009, 09:03 AM:name=Tesseract)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Tesseract @ Jul 22 2009, 09:03 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1718638"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Logical fallacy: ad hominem. You're saying Windows is bad because <b><i>I</i></b> apparently only care about the visual elements of an operating system. And if you could talk about it then <b>do it</b>. If you're going to claim something, then be aware that proof by assertion is also a logical fallacy. I'm being open here, please prove to me that Microsoft technologies are 'bad' or 'redundant.'<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> It's not ad hominem. I never said that's all you care about, nor did I mean that. Different users have different needs. Saying "show me it's technically better" can't be proven because I don't know how you evaluate "better". <a href="http://tinyurl.com/nurthr" target="_blank">Here</a> are some benchmarks. I'm not going to bother posting anymore links though, if you don't believe me prove me wrong. <!--quoteo(post=1718638:date=Jul 22 2009, 09:03 AM:name=Tesseract)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Tesseract @ Jul 22 2009, 09:03 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1718638"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->I <b>said</b> in my previous post that I am aware of the Browser Wars, and I don't advocate all their practices there, but hey, Firefox is doing well for itself, as is Safari. Also for a company that are trying to dominate the market how come Microsoft backed out of IE for the Mac and <a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20080106181017/http://www.microsoft.com/mac/products/internetexplorer/internetexplorer.aspx?pid=internetexplorer" target="_blank">recommended Apple's Safari</a>? Is this part of their 'evil scheme'? Advising people to use a competitor's browser? How evil!<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> Talk about logical fallacies, all you do is create strawmen or reductio ad absurdium. You don't have to care about their past and current business practices. That link you posted only exists because of the antitrust suit. It's not as if that suddenly erases all that happened. <!--quoteo(post=1718638:date=Jul 22 2009, 09:03 AM:name=Tesseract)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Tesseract @ Jul 22 2009, 09:03 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1718638"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Since when has it been illegal? Not that it's a respectable campaign, but hey, I'm not the one yelling "Microsoft's software is bad" without actually backing it up with empirical data.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> <a href="http://www.seattlepi.com/business/1310ap_us_online_product_reviews.html" target="_blank">Astroturfing</a> has always fallen under existing false advertising laws. To be fair it was only just prosecuted by itself recently. <!--quoteo(post=1718638:date=Jul 22 2009, 09:03 AM:name=Tesseract)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Tesseract @ Jul 22 2009, 09:03 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1718638"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Again with the ad hominem, "oh you <b>must</b> be a home desktop user, so you're wrong because you are." This is wrong, anyway, I am not <b>just</b> some 'casual computer user,' although for casual computer usage I use Windows, yes, but when I run servers it's Linux (Gentoo and Fedora, if you're wondering) so grow up and stop accusing me of being some Windows-only gamer-only user. If you can't give any better arguments (see: ones that aren't logically fallacious) then don't resort to throwing an incorrect insult at me, yeesh.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> What? You're being too self-centric here, this is not a personal attack, I never implied any of this. I run both Windows and flavors of Linux too, but that's irrelevant to the discussion. I'm not saying your wrong, I'm saying different people use different criteria. There is no one "best operating system" technically, they all have their own niche. You're saying only technical aspects matter to you and I'm telling you why I take other considerations into account. <!--quoteo(post=1718638:date=Jul 22 2009, 09:03 AM:name=Tesseract)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Tesseract @ Jul 22 2009, 09:03 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1718638"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->People you're really reading me wrong here, I'm asking "what's wrong with the Windows API/DirectX/.NET" and I'm getting, "OMG BLIND MICRO$$$$OFT FANBOI OMGGGGGGGG LERN2LINUX THEN TALK" and frankly this is my problem with the Linux community. You can't have a decent debate about proprietary software without them leaping to arms and declaring how closed-source is bad because it's bad and evil and OMG MICROSOFT and all this. Stop going off like a mousetrap about this stuff and for the love of Christ <b>shut up about the browser wars</b>. If you want to argue about something being 'redundant' then referencing that damn piece of history certainly counts as it. Especially as in the modern day there's Firefox, Opera, Safari and Chrome, all of which are doing all right for themselves. I have yet to see any of them be bought out by Microsoft, or crushed by Microsoft.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> Okay so you're not talking about the OS any more but these ancillary technologies? Also again with the reductio ad absurdium, you may not care about proprietary vs open source, but it is important to someone building a new technology. This debate is not about "Microsoft is evil" no matter how much you assert it is. Microsoft's anti-trust practices are just examples of how closed source can be bad. The fact that you continue to assert this leads me to believe you don't understand why Free/Open Source is beneficial. <!--quoteo(post=1718638:date=Jul 22 2009, 09:03 AM:name=Tesseract)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Tesseract @ Jul 22 2009, 09:03 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1718638"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Please come back to the point I've been repeatedly asking but getting no response to: "what's wrong with the Windows API/DirectX/.NET?" And the next person to mention Microsoft's business practices or the browser wars could you kindly unregister from these forums because this is really only for people who are capable of reading English or who understand English when it is read to them (text-to-speech or someone nearby). Remember I want someone to prove the stuff is bad; this is not me trying to prove it's good. Stop assuming I'm out to get you people, I just want some irreputable facts. TIA<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> And now you're resorting to personal attacks. For one who likes to mention logical fallacies, you sure use them a lot.
Those technologies themselves may be fine and may even be best in class, but anyone having to use those technologies has to worry about vendor lock-in. Given how Microsoft has leveraged its technologies in the past(google: "embrace, extend, and extinguish") this can be a threat to the technology or application you're developing. It matters in the home desktop realm to a lesser extent, but it's not uncommon such as MS originally not creating a DX10 driver for XP in hopes of forcing a switch to Vista.
FYI, the word you're looking for is "irrefutable". Irreputable facts would be facts of poor repute.
Not quotin' stuff if I don't really have a problem with it:
<!--quoteo(post=1718653:date=Jul 22 2009, 03:54 PM:name=locallyunscene)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (locallyunscene @ Jul 22 2009, 03:54 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1718653"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Talk about logical fallacies, all you do is create strawmen or reductio ad absurdium.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->Uh... reductio ad absurdum isn't a logical fallacy. At all. And yes, I do straw man. But if it's about the Safari business well, IE for Mac didn't come on Macs by default; I can't see how the antitrust suite (based primarily upon Windows systems) affected it. They just seemed to <a href="http://www.mozillazine.org/talkback.html?article=3285" target="_blank">not be interested in it</a>. <a href="http://www.mozillazine.org/talkback.html?article=24004" target="_blank">And they seemed pretty friendly to Mozilla, didn't they</a>? I'm not going to say "oh the whole browser wars wasn't a big deal" but come on, can people mention Microsoft without stickying a tissue about the whole browser war issue. I don't like IE either but I'm sick to goddamn death of hearing "but in the BROWSER WARS" or "the way they acted in the BROWSER WARS" for the love of a crippled Christ, it's a boring topic that <b>I am not defending them on</b>. Even if they are mean and IE happens to also be terrible, this does not somehow make all of Microsoft terrible. And fine, I'll stop using straw man if you stop arguing a moot point.
<!--quoteo(post=1718653:date=Jul 22 2009, 03:54 PM:name=locallyunscene)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (locallyunscene @ Jul 22 2009, 03:54 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1718653"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Okay so you're not talking about the OS any more but these ancillary technologies? Also again with the reductio ad absurdium, you may not care about proprietary vs open source, but it is important to someone building a new technology. This debate is not about "Microsoft is evil" no matter how much you assert it is. Microsoft's anti-trust practices are just examples of how closed source can be bad. The fact that you continue to assert this leads me to believe you don't understand why Free/Open Source is beneficial.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->This is my problem, <b>I am not caring as to whether Microsoft are bad or anti-trust merchants</b>, I am merely asking what makes Windows 'redundant' and how the technology behind it is bad. This is what I first asked, look:
<!--quoteo(post=1718436:date=Jul 21 2009, 04:02 PM:name=Tesseract)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Tesseract @ Jul 21 2009, 04:02 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1718436"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->That's a sweeping statement. What makes it redundant? That it's proprietary?<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->followed by <!--quoteo(post=1718552:date=Jul 22 2009, 12:07 AM:name=Tesseract)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Tesseract @ Jul 22 2009, 12:07 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1718552"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Frankly you have yet to tell me why the technical side of Microsoft's software is bad. DirectX? The Windows API? .NET? Come on, I'm open to your debates here but don't just go "lol M$ r teh evul." You can be evil and a genius, you know. PROVE to me that their software is bad. I'm asking you to. Don't just whine that they're mean. Talk about their actual products.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->this being the post you then referred to saying that Microsoft were evil and calling me part of the GAP generation, then accuse me of using a valid argument tactic (reductio ad absurdum) against you (damn me and my evil ways).
Also: <!--quoteo(post=1718653:date=Jul 22 2009, 03:54 PM:name=locallyunscene)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (locallyunscene @ Jul 22 2009, 03:54 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1718653"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->I'm not going to bother posting anymore links though, if you don't believe me prove me wrong.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->I'm merely asking people to tell me what's wrong with technology, I have not run in going "WHOA WHOA LOL LINUCKZ DISSIN MIRCROSOFT PITY UR SYSTM IS CRAP" or anything. Stop making accusing statements that imply I'm <b>just</b> out for an argument. I'm going to argue if I see something I disagree with but I'm not a Microsoft zealot. I'm just sick of anti-Microsoft zealots who don't know anything about what they're talking about. I assure you that you are not such a person - I'm just sick of encountering them.
<!--quoteo(post=1718653:date=Jul 22 2009, 03:54 PM:name=locallyunscene)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (locallyunscene @ Jul 22 2009, 03:54 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1718653"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->FYI, the word you're looking for is "irrefutable". Irreputable facts would be facts of poor repute.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->Yeah, typo, my bad. I do know the difference between the two words but thanks for implying I'm stupid. :)
and finally <!--quoteo(post=1718653:date=Jul 22 2009, 03:54 PM:name=locallyunscene)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (locallyunscene @ Jul 22 2009, 03:54 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1718653"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->There is no one "best operating system" technically, they all have their own niche.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->This is pretty much exactly how I feel, but that's why I get sick of people hating on a system just because it's not the one they're using.
AsranielJoin Date: 2002-06-03Member: 724Members, Playtest Lead, Forum Moderators, NS2 Playtester, Squad Five Blue, Reinforced - Shadow, WC 2013 - Shadow, Subnautica Playtester, Retired Community Developer
Could you please open a new thread called os flaming? i'm really not interested in this. And i won't stop posting my link until at least one sane person here read it <a href="http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article&item=linux_gaming_frank&num=1" target="_blank">http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=arti...frank&num=1</a>
I've learned relatively nothing new. I knew there was a market, I knew certain things had issues (I had a flowchart somewhere for all the ways you could make sound in Linux), and I know it's not as bad as most people think to port especially in the graphics area.
locallyunsceneFeeder of TrollsJoin Date: 2002-12-25Member: 11528Members, Constellation
<!--quoteo(post=1718697:date=Jul 22 2009, 03:12 PM:name=Tesseract)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Tesseract @ Jul 22 2009, 03:12 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1718697"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Uh... reductio ad absurdum isn't a logical fallacy. At all.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> When combined with a strawman it is. <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reductio_ad_absurdum" target="_blank">wikilink</a>. <!--quoteo(post=1718697:date=Jul 22 2009, 03:12 PM:name=Tesseract)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Tesseract @ Jul 22 2009, 03:12 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1718697"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->This is my problem, <b>I am not caring as to whether Microsoft are bad or anti-trust merchants</b>, I am merely asking what makes Windows 'redundant' and how the technology behind it is bad.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> I explained how the closed source nature of MS combined with it's business practiced could be a liability. You don't have to care, as I said different people have different criteria. I make no claims of Windows being 'redundant' as I'm not sure what is meant by that. <!--quoteo(post=1718697:date=Jul 22 2009, 03:12 PM:name=Tesseract)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Tesseract @ Jul 22 2009, 03:12 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1718697"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->followed by this being the post you then referred to saying that Microsoft were evil and calling me part of the GAP generation<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> I did not, I merely made a comparison of apathy. I don't care what clothes you wear, I just commented that the level of apathy would be similar. <!--quoteo(post=1718697:date=Jul 22 2009, 03:12 PM:name=Tesseract)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Tesseract @ Jul 22 2009, 03:12 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1718697"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->I'm merely asking people to tell me what's wrong with technology, I have not run in going "WHOA WHOA LOL LINUCKZ DISSIN MIRCROSOFT PITY UR SYSTM IS CRAP" or anything. Stop making accusing statements that imply I'm <b>just</b> out for an argument. I'm going to argue if I see something I disagree with but I'm not a Microsoft zealot. I'm just sick of anti-Microsoft zealots who don't know anything about what they're talking about. I assure you that you are not such a person - I'm just sick of encountering them.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> No one has said anything of the sort. <!--quoteo(post=1718697:date=Jul 22 2009, 03:12 PM:name=Tesseract)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Tesseract @ Jul 22 2009, 03:12 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1718697"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Yeah, typo, my bad. I do know the difference between the two words but thanks for implying I'm stupid. :)<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> Sorry, but please don't mistake my brevity for animosity. I just figured you'd want to know. <!--quoteo(post=1718697:date=Jul 22 2009, 03:12 PM:name=Tesseract)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Tesseract @ Jul 22 2009, 03:12 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1718697"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->and finally This is pretty much exactly how I feel, but that's why I get sick of people hating on a system just because it's not the one they're using.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> And I'm asking you to realize that some people choose GNU/Linux over Windows for technical reasons based on their need, such as old hardware, and some do for other reasons. I'm not trying to convert you to Linux; I just hope that you see the reasons why some people do.
<!--quoteo(post=1718764:date=Jul 22 2009, 10:21 PM:name=locallyunscene)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (locallyunscene @ Jul 22 2009, 10:21 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1718764"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->And I'm asking you to realize that some people choose GNU/Linux over Windows for technical reasons based on their need, such as old hardware, and some do for other reasons. I'm not trying to convert you to Linux; I just hope that you see the reasons why some people do.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
This isn't what I'm saying aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa
Why do you keep going back to this? Someone earlier called Windows redundant and I asked them to explain themself. Someone countered with "Windows is redundant because Microsoft is bad." Do you see what my problem is? No-one is addressing what I'm asking. I don't want some BS little "Linux conversion" because I already use Linux quite happily. This machine is a Vista/Gentoo dual booter, and I use both quite a lot. Downstairs I have a Fedora server, running on old (2002) hardware. I do not need converting. Linux is nothing to do with my question here. Seriously, why does no-one answer this? Someone goes "Windows is redundant" right here: <!--quoteo(post=1716836:date=Jul 11 2009, 09:00 AM:name=borsuk)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (borsuk @ Jul 11 2009, 09:00 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1716836"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->And amazingly, some people don't want a redundant operating system like Windows.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->this^
I was directly addressing THAT GUY and everyone leaps in thinking "Oh God he's asking someone to explain themselves ZEALOT MODE ACTIVATE -- Microsoft BAD Linux GREAT Open Source NOT EVIL HURHURHUR." Every time someone argues and mentions Linux and/or the Browser War I have to wring my hands and curse peoples' refusal to address the question. I feel like I'm in an American political debate and just asked a candidate their stance on abortion or something. The way people will argue any topic other than "what makes Windows 'redundant'?" Please someone just say <b>something</b> relevant I'm getting sceptical that anyone here besides locallyunscene knows what they're talking about, even if he has been focusing on a tangent.
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->1 a: exceeding what is necessary or normal : superfluous b: characterized by or containing an excess ; specifically : using more words than necessary c: characterized by similarity or repetition <a group of particularly redundant brick buildings> dchiefly British : no longer needed for a job and hence laid off 2: profuse, lavish 3: serving as a duplicate for preventing failure of an entire system (as a spacecraft) upon failure of a single component<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->re⋅dun⋅dant  [ri-duhn-duhnt] –adjective 1. characterized by verbosity or unnecessary repetition in expressing ideas; prolix: a redundant style. 2. being in excess; exceeding what is usual or natural: a redundant part. 3. having some unusual or extra part or feature. 4. characterized by superabundance or superfluity: lush, redundant vegetation. 5. Engineering. a. (of a structural member) not necessary for resisting statically determined stresses. b. (of a structure) having members designed to resist other than statically determined stresses; hyperstatic. c. noting a complete truss having additional members for resisting eccentric loads. Compare complete (def. 8), incomplete (def. 3). d. (of a device, circuit, computer system, etc.) having excess or duplicate parts that can continue to perform in the event of malfunction of some of the parts. 6. Linguistics. characterized by redundancy; predictable. 7. Computers. containing more bits or characters than are required, as a parity bit inserted for checking purposes. 8. Chiefly British. removed or laid off from a job.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<!--QuoteBegin-Wikipedia+--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Wikipedia)</div><div class='quotemain'><!--QuoteEBegin-->The state of being redundant or excessive; a needless repetition in language; excessive wordiness. Over and over, as in the same style or manner.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Windows is only redundant if it does everything the same as everyone else. Or, more strictly, it has the same characteristics as another OS. Redundant also carries the connotation of doing it worse or superfluously, not necessary to exist.
However, while the "basic" functionality of all OSs are essentially the same by creating a platform for applications and giving access to the hardware, each one has its own quirks and nuances. Also, different developers tend to build on one OS or the other (although there are many movements to change this), making what you can run on your OS different between OSs. Also, optimizations for certain features can be better or worse between systems.
So, in a strict sense, I don't see how Windows is redundant.
<a href="http://www.osnews.com/story/21887/Linus_Microsoft_Hatred_Is_a_Disease_" target="_blank">Microsoft hatred is a disease</a>
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->I'm a big believer in "technology over politics". I don't care who it comes from, as long as there are solid reasons for the code, and as long as we don't have to worry about licensing etc issues.
I may make jokes about Microsoft at times, but at the same time, I think the Microsoft hatred is a disease. I believe in open development, and that very much involves not just making the source open, but also not shutting other people and companies out.
There are 'extremists' in the free software world, but that's one major reason why I don't call what I do 'free software' any more. I don't want to be associated with the people for whom it's about exclusion and hatred."
- Linus Torvalds, creator of Linux<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
locallyunsceneFeeder of TrollsJoin Date: 2002-12-25Member: 11528Members, Constellation
<!--quoteo(post=1719151:date=Jul 24 2009, 10:05 AM:name=Phlash)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Phlash @ Jul 24 2009, 10:05 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1719151"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec--><a href="http://www.osnews.com/story/21887/Linus_Microsoft_Hatred_Is_a_Disease_" target="_blank">Microsoft hatred is a disease</a><!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> There are fanatics in the world for everything. Don't mistake caution for hatred though.
<!--quoteo(post=1719104:date=Jul 23 2009, 11:47 PM:name=Tesseract)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Tesseract @ Jul 23 2009, 11:47 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1719104"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Just as a hint, Chrome OS != Android, but, I must say, good job at looking ignorant. Maybe next time you'll diss something relevant like OpenGL.
...ah, but that'd require research and/or knowledge.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Who said anything about Android?
Chrome OS is gonna be a bootable browser. And all the application will be running off a website. I could imagine the only way to implement NS to work with Chrome OS is to have it run in JAVA on a website.
P.S it was a joke. (In case you didn't realize. Well why would you, Mr "know it all")
<!--quoteo(post=1719196:date=Jul 24 2009, 08:34 PM:name=SjN)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (SjN @ Jul 24 2009, 08:34 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1719196"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Who said anything about Android?
Chrome OS is gonna be a bootable browser. And all the application will be running off a website. I could imagine the only way to implement NS to work with Chrome OS is to have it run in JAVA on a website.
P.S it was a joke. (In case you didn't realize. Well why would you, Mr "know it all")<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> Chrome OS is a Linux distro, it's designed to primarily run off the net but even if it didn't natively have the ability to install applications it could easily be added. The only major difference is the lack of the X Window System. Java is not the only language ever; it's the language for Android apps but I highly doubt that non-ARM architechture OS will not include more.
<b>Linux users are about 5% of Quake Live players. </b>
Says ttimo, an id Software employee. <a href="http://ttimo.vox.com/library/post/id-software-and-linux.html" target="_blank">http://ttimo.vox.com/library/post/id-software-and-linux.html</a> This is the most accurate estimate of Linux gamers so far, I think. Especially when it comes to FPS games.
Things can be very different for other game types. Mystic Mine is a 'for the whole family' kind of game, played with a single key. <!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Recently I got interviewed by Linux Gaming News about my indie game Mystic Mine, and one of the questions was how many Linux copies I sold. I looked into it and saw that I sell the most copies for Mac OS X, then for Linux, and the least for Windows. I didn’t make much of it, because as an indie game developer it’s easier to get noticed on Mac OS X or Linux than on Windows. And selling games is all about exposure. But after people started to ask questions on this, I looked further into it, and what I discovered really surprised me. (...) I released Mystic Mine the 3rd of February 2009, so currently there is 7 months of statistical data. (...) So I got 40.29% visitors using Windows, 36.30% using Mac and 22.58% using Linux. Nothing special with these figures, because it’s easier to get Mac or Linux exposure, but there are still a lot more Windows users.
But if you look at my sales, that’s quite a different story:
* Mac OS X: 42.72% * Linux: 33.98% * Windows: 23.30% (...) As you can see Linux is way up there, which is quite a surprise to say the least. For every 232 Linux visitors I get on my website, one of them buys my game. If you compare that to windows users, I need 526 of them to get a sale. For Mac OS X it’s 256. So who would have thought that Linux users are the most eager to buy an indie game? Certainly not me.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> <a href="http://www.koonsolo.com/news/?p=33" target="_blank">http://www.koonsolo.com/news/?p=33</a>
Honestly the first thing I'd like to see released for linux would be the dedicated server, because a lot of dedicated servers nowadays are hosted on Linux systems. Naturally I'd love to see a client for it as well, but in the short term having a dedicated server up for Linux would help NS2 enormously as it would allow alot more people to host servers for the game, and presumably would be a lot less work to port over than the entire game client.
<!--quoteo(post=1729046:date=Sep 27 2009, 06:02 AM:name=borsuk)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (borsuk @ Sep 27 2009, 06:02 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1729046"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->I'm not sure it has been posted, but
<b>Linux users are about 5% of Quake Live players. </b><!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
How many Quake Live players are there though? 5% sounds huge but 5% of 100 isn't a lot, just as a quick inaccurate example to prove a point.
<!--quoteo(post=1729120:date=Sep 27 2009, 08:02 PM:name=Thaldarin)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Thaldarin @ Sep 27 2009, 08:02 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1729120"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->How many Quake Live players are there though? 5% sounds huge but 5% of 100 isn't a lot, just as a quick inaccurate example to prove a point.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
How many there are I don't know. But if you bothered to check the link I provided in the same post, you'd see "which is in line with the company's previous releases".
Comments
This is just silly. I could talk about how most distros run better on lower end machines or how the permissions system on more distros is better and show bench marks and case studies, but most users don't care about that stuff. To them "better technically" means "prettier UI".
And it's not about them being "mean" or "evul", it's about stagnating the browser market for 5 years through anti-trust practices. It's about running campaigns that literally spread lies about competitors, and using shills to do it. Astroturfing is not just "mean", it's also illegal and for good reasons.
And all of this is part of their "actual products". If you're just a home desktop user, I can see why this stuff wouldn't matter much to you. It's similar to how people buy GAP and other sweatshop products.
If you're a small business owner though, this stuff along with worrying about licensing closed-source software, and getting locked in.
I know that, but to give you an example, google use linux in their dedicated servers. Not only google, wikipedia, sourceforge, slashdot and many other "well known" websites uses linux (or a unix variant) in their servers.
The same thing apply to HLDS, acording to game-monitor . com, actually there are 66105 hlds servers in linux, and 33160 in windows environments, 200% more.
So your line between reality and imagination is not totally screwed up, just a little bit :P
<a href="http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article&item=linux_gaming_frank&num=1" target="_blank">http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=arti...frank&num=1</a>
The same thing apply to HLDS, acording to game-monitor . com, actually there are 66105 hlds servers in linux, and 33160 in windows environments, 200% more.
So your line between reality and imagination is not totally screwed up, just a little bit :P<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Not at all, windows operators are just as serious as linux operators as first said. Half-Life based games do run better on a linux machine there is no doubt about that, however not all games do, some restrictions on games can cause them to be Windows server based only. NS2 is a game it is not based on a Half-Life/Source engine, so until we see a server for windows & linux, no one can judge or tell.
Logical fallacy: ad hominem. You're saying Windows is bad because <b><i>I</i></b> apparently only care about the visual elements of an operating system. And if you could talk about it then <b>do it</b>. If you're going to claim something, then be aware that proof by assertion is also a logical fallacy. I'm being open here, please prove to me that Microsoft technologies are 'bad' or 'redundant.'
<!--quoteo(post=1718577:date=Jul 22 2009, 03:15 AM:name=locallyunscene)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (locallyunscene @ Jul 22 2009, 03:15 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1718577"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->And it's not about them being "mean" or "evul", it's about stagnating the browser market for 5 years through anti-trust practices.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I <b>said</b> in my previous post that I am aware of the Browser Wars, and I don't advocate all their practices there, but hey, Firefox is doing well for itself, as is Safari. Also for a company that are trying to dominate the market how come Microsoft backed out of IE for the Mac and <a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20080106181017/http://www.microsoft.com/mac/products/internetexplorer/internetexplorer.aspx?pid=internetexplorer" target="_blank">recommended Apple's Safari</a>? Is this part of their 'evil scheme'? Advising people to use a competitor's browser? How evil!
<!--quoteo(post=1718577:date=Jul 22 2009, 03:15 AM:name=locallyunscene)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (locallyunscene @ Jul 22 2009, 03:15 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1718577"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->It's about running campaigns that literally spread lies about competitors, and using shills to do it. Astroturfing is not just "mean", it's also illegal and for good reasons.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->Since when has it been illegal? Not that it's a respectable campaign, but hey, I'm not the one yelling "Microsoft's software is bad" without actually backing it up with empirical data.
<!--quoteo(post=1718577:date=Jul 22 2009, 03:15 AM:name=locallyunscene)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (locallyunscene @ Jul 22 2009, 03:15 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1718577"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->And all of this is part of their "actual products". If you're just a home desktop user, I can see why this stuff wouldn't matter much to you. It's similar to how people buy GAP and other sweatshop products.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->Again with the ad hominem, "oh you <b>must</b> be a home desktop user, so you're wrong because you are." This is wrong, anyway, I am not <b>just</b> some 'casual computer user,' although for casual computer usage I use Windows, yes, but when I run servers it's Linux (Gentoo and Fedora, if you're wondering) so grow up and stop accusing me of being some Windows-only gamer-only user. If you can't give any better arguments (see: ones that aren't logically fallacious) then don't resort to throwing an incorrect insult at me, yeesh.
People you're really reading me wrong here, I'm asking "what's wrong with the Windows API/DirectX/.NET" and I'm getting, "OMG BLIND MICRO$$$$OFT FANBOI OMGGGGGGGG LERN2LINUX THEN TALK" and frankly this is my problem with the Linux community. You can't have a decent debate about proprietary software without them leaping to arms and declaring how closed-source is bad because it's bad and evil and OMG MICROSOFT and all this. Stop going off like a mousetrap about this stuff and for the love of Christ <b>shut up about the browser wars</b>. If you want to argue about something being 'redundant' then referencing that damn piece of history certainly counts as it. Especially as in the modern day there's Firefox, Opera, Safari and Chrome, all of which are doing all right for themselves. I have yet to see any of them be bought out by Microsoft, or crushed by Microsoft.
Please come back to the point I've been repeatedly asking but getting no response to: "what's wrong with the Windows API/DirectX/.NET?" And the next person to mention Microsoft's business practices or the browser wars could you kindly unregister from these forums because this is really only for people who are capable of reading English or who understand English when it is read to them (text-to-speech or someone nearby). Remember I want someone to prove the stuff is bad; this is not me trying to prove it's good. Stop assuming I'm out to get you people, I just want some irreputable facts. TIA
It's not ad hominem. I never said that's all you care about, nor did I mean that. Different users have different needs. Saying "show me it's technically better" can't be proven because I don't know how you evaluate "better". <a href="http://tinyurl.com/nurthr" target="_blank">Here</a> are some benchmarks. I'm not going to bother posting anymore links though, if you don't believe me prove me wrong.
<!--quoteo(post=1718638:date=Jul 22 2009, 09:03 AM:name=Tesseract)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Tesseract @ Jul 22 2009, 09:03 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1718638"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->I <b>said</b> in my previous post that I am aware of the Browser Wars, and I don't advocate all their practices there, but hey, Firefox is doing well for itself, as is Safari. Also for a company that are trying to dominate the market how come Microsoft backed out of IE for the Mac and <a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20080106181017/http://www.microsoft.com/mac/products/internetexplorer/internetexplorer.aspx?pid=internetexplorer" target="_blank">recommended Apple's Safari</a>? Is this part of their 'evil scheme'? Advising people to use a competitor's browser? How evil!<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Talk about logical fallacies, all you do is create strawmen or reductio ad absurdium. You don't have to care about their past and current business practices. That link you posted only exists because of the antitrust suit. It's not as if that suddenly erases all that happened.
<!--quoteo(post=1718638:date=Jul 22 2009, 09:03 AM:name=Tesseract)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Tesseract @ Jul 22 2009, 09:03 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1718638"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Since when has it been illegal? Not that it's a respectable campaign, but hey, I'm not the one yelling "Microsoft's software is bad" without actually backing it up with empirical data.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<a href="http://www.seattlepi.com/business/1310ap_us_online_product_reviews.html" target="_blank">Astroturfing</a> has always fallen under existing false advertising laws. To be fair it was only just prosecuted by itself recently.
<!--quoteo(post=1718638:date=Jul 22 2009, 09:03 AM:name=Tesseract)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Tesseract @ Jul 22 2009, 09:03 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1718638"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Again with the ad hominem, "oh you <b>must</b> be a home desktop user, so you're wrong because you are." This is wrong, anyway, I am not <b>just</b> some 'casual computer user,' although for casual computer usage I use Windows, yes, but when I run servers it's Linux (Gentoo and Fedora, if you're wondering) so grow up and stop accusing me of being some Windows-only gamer-only user. If you can't give any better arguments (see: ones that aren't logically fallacious) then don't resort to throwing an incorrect insult at me, yeesh.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
What? You're being too self-centric here, this is not a personal attack, I never implied any of this. I run both Windows and flavors of Linux too, but that's irrelevant to the discussion. I'm not saying your wrong, I'm saying different people use different criteria. There is no one "best operating system" technically, they all have their own niche. You're saying only technical aspects matter to you and I'm telling you why I take other considerations into account.
<!--quoteo(post=1718638:date=Jul 22 2009, 09:03 AM:name=Tesseract)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Tesseract @ Jul 22 2009, 09:03 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1718638"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->People you're really reading me wrong here, I'm asking "what's wrong with the Windows API/DirectX/.NET" and I'm getting, "OMG BLIND MICRO$$$$OFT FANBOI OMGGGGGGGG LERN2LINUX THEN TALK" and frankly this is my problem with the Linux community. You can't have a decent debate about proprietary software without them leaping to arms and declaring how closed-source is bad because it's bad and evil and OMG MICROSOFT and all this. Stop going off like a mousetrap about this stuff and for the love of Christ <b>shut up about the browser wars</b>. If you want to argue about something being 'redundant' then referencing that damn piece of history certainly counts as it. Especially as in the modern day there's Firefox, Opera, Safari and Chrome, all of which are doing all right for themselves. I have yet to see any of them be bought out by Microsoft, or crushed by Microsoft.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Okay so you're not talking about the OS any more but these ancillary technologies? Also again with the reductio ad absurdium, you may not care about proprietary vs open source, but it is important to someone building a new technology. This debate is not about "Microsoft is evil" no matter how much you assert it is. Microsoft's anti-trust practices are just examples of how closed source can be bad. The fact that you continue to assert this leads me to believe you don't understand why Free/Open Source is beneficial.
<!--quoteo(post=1718638:date=Jul 22 2009, 09:03 AM:name=Tesseract)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Tesseract @ Jul 22 2009, 09:03 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1718638"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Please come back to the point I've been repeatedly asking but getting no response to: "what's wrong with the Windows API/DirectX/.NET?" And the next person to mention Microsoft's business practices or the browser wars could you kindly unregister from these forums because this is really only for people who are capable of reading English or who understand English when it is read to them (text-to-speech or someone nearby). Remember I want someone to prove the stuff is bad; this is not me trying to prove it's good. Stop assuming I'm out to get you people, I just want some irreputable facts. TIA<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
And now you're resorting to personal attacks. For one who likes to mention logical fallacies, you sure use them a lot.
Those technologies themselves may be fine and may even be best in class, but anyone having to use those technologies has to worry about vendor lock-in. Given how Microsoft has leveraged its technologies in the past(google: "embrace, extend, and extinguish") this can be a threat to the technology or application you're developing. It matters in the home desktop realm to a lesser extent, but it's not uncommon such as MS originally not creating a DX10 driver for XP in hopes of forcing a switch to Vista.
FYI, the word you're looking for is "irrefutable". Irreputable facts would be facts of poor repute.
<!--quoteo(post=1718653:date=Jul 22 2009, 03:54 PM:name=locallyunscene)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (locallyunscene @ Jul 22 2009, 03:54 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1718653"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Talk about logical fallacies, all you do is create strawmen or reductio ad absurdium.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->Uh... reductio ad absurdum isn't a logical fallacy. At all.
And yes, I do straw man. But if it's about the Safari business well, IE for Mac didn't come on Macs by default; I can't see how the antitrust suite (based primarily upon Windows systems) affected it. They just seemed to <a href="http://www.mozillazine.org/talkback.html?article=3285" target="_blank">not be interested in it</a>. <a href="http://www.mozillazine.org/talkback.html?article=24004" target="_blank">And they seemed pretty friendly to Mozilla, didn't they</a>? I'm not going to say "oh the whole browser wars wasn't a big deal" but come on, can people mention Microsoft without stickying a tissue about the whole browser war issue. I don't like IE either but I'm sick to goddamn death of hearing "but in the BROWSER WARS" or "the way they acted in the BROWSER WARS" for the love of a crippled Christ, it's a boring topic that <b>I am not defending them on</b>. Even if they are mean and IE happens to also be terrible, this does not somehow make all of Microsoft terrible. And fine, I'll stop using straw man if you stop arguing a moot point.
<!--quoteo(post=1718653:date=Jul 22 2009, 03:54 PM:name=locallyunscene)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (locallyunscene @ Jul 22 2009, 03:54 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1718653"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Okay so you're not talking about the OS any more but these ancillary technologies? Also again with the reductio ad absurdium, you may not care about proprietary vs open source, but it is important to someone building a new technology. This debate is not about "Microsoft is evil" no matter how much you assert it is. Microsoft's anti-trust practices are just examples of how closed source can be bad. The fact that you continue to assert this leads me to believe you don't understand why Free/Open Source is beneficial.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->This is my problem, <b>I am not caring as to whether Microsoft are bad or anti-trust merchants</b>, I am merely asking what makes Windows 'redundant' and how the technology behind it is bad. This is what I first asked, look:
<!--quoteo(post=1718436:date=Jul 21 2009, 04:02 PM:name=Tesseract)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Tesseract @ Jul 21 2009, 04:02 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1718436"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->That's a sweeping statement. What makes it redundant? That it's proprietary?<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->followed by <!--quoteo(post=1718552:date=Jul 22 2009, 12:07 AM:name=Tesseract)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Tesseract @ Jul 22 2009, 12:07 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1718552"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Frankly you have yet to tell me why the technical side of Microsoft's software is bad. DirectX? The Windows API? .NET? Come on, I'm open to your debates here but don't just go "lol M$ r teh evul." You can be evil and a genius, you know. PROVE to me that their software is bad. I'm asking you to. Don't just whine that they're mean. Talk about their actual products.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->this being the post you then referred to saying that Microsoft were evil and calling me part of the GAP generation, then accuse me of using a valid argument tactic (reductio ad absurdum) against you (damn me and my evil ways).
Also:
<!--quoteo(post=1718653:date=Jul 22 2009, 03:54 PM:name=locallyunscene)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (locallyunscene @ Jul 22 2009, 03:54 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1718653"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->I'm not going to bother posting anymore links though, if you don't believe me prove me wrong.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->I'm merely asking people to tell me what's wrong with technology, I have not run in going "WHOA WHOA LOL LINUCKZ DISSIN MIRCROSOFT PITY UR SYSTM IS CRAP" or anything. Stop making accusing statements that imply I'm <b>just</b> out for an argument. I'm going to argue if I see something I disagree with but I'm not a Microsoft zealot. I'm just sick of anti-Microsoft zealots who don't know anything about what they're talking about. I assure you that you are not such a person - I'm just sick of encountering them.
<!--quoteo(post=1718653:date=Jul 22 2009, 03:54 PM:name=locallyunscene)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (locallyunscene @ Jul 22 2009, 03:54 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1718653"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->FYI, the word you're looking for is "irrefutable". Irreputable facts would be facts of poor repute.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->Yeah, typo, my bad. I do know the difference between the two words but thanks for implying I'm stupid. :)
and finally <!--quoteo(post=1718653:date=Jul 22 2009, 03:54 PM:name=locallyunscene)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (locallyunscene @ Jul 22 2009, 03:54 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1718653"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->There is no one "best operating system" technically, they all have their own niche.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->This is pretty much exactly how I feel, but that's why I get sick of people hating on a system just because it's not the one they're using.
<a href="http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article&item=linux_gaming_frank&num=1" target="_blank">http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=arti...frank&num=1</a>
I've learned relatively nothing new. I knew there was a market, I knew certain things had issues (I had a flowchart somewhere for all the ways you could make sound in Linux), and I know it's not as bad as most people think to port especially in the graphics area.
When combined with a strawman it is. <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reductio_ad_absurdum" target="_blank">wikilink</a>.
<!--quoteo(post=1718697:date=Jul 22 2009, 03:12 PM:name=Tesseract)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Tesseract @ Jul 22 2009, 03:12 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1718697"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->This is my problem, <b>I am not caring as to whether Microsoft are bad or anti-trust merchants</b>, I am merely asking what makes Windows 'redundant' and how the technology behind it is bad.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I explained how the closed source nature of MS combined with it's business practiced could be a liability. You don't have to care, as I said different people have different criteria. I make no claims of Windows being 'redundant' as I'm not sure what is meant by that.
<!--quoteo(post=1718697:date=Jul 22 2009, 03:12 PM:name=Tesseract)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Tesseract @ Jul 22 2009, 03:12 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1718697"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->followed by this being the post you then referred to saying that Microsoft were evil and calling me part of the GAP generation<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I did not, I merely made a comparison of apathy. I don't care what clothes you wear, I just commented that the level of apathy would be similar.
<!--quoteo(post=1718697:date=Jul 22 2009, 03:12 PM:name=Tesseract)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Tesseract @ Jul 22 2009, 03:12 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1718697"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->I'm merely asking people to tell me what's wrong with technology, I have not run in going "WHOA WHOA LOL LINUCKZ DISSIN MIRCROSOFT PITY UR SYSTM IS CRAP" or anything. Stop making accusing statements that imply I'm <b>just</b> out for an argument. I'm going to argue if I see something I disagree with but I'm not a Microsoft zealot. I'm just sick of anti-Microsoft zealots who don't know anything about what they're talking about. I assure you that you are not such a person - I'm just sick of encountering them.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
No one has said anything of the sort.
<!--quoteo(post=1718697:date=Jul 22 2009, 03:12 PM:name=Tesseract)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Tesseract @ Jul 22 2009, 03:12 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1718697"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Yeah, typo, my bad. I do know the difference between the two words but thanks for implying I'm stupid. :)<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Sorry, but please don't mistake my brevity for animosity. I just figured you'd want to know.
<!--quoteo(post=1718697:date=Jul 22 2009, 03:12 PM:name=Tesseract)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Tesseract @ Jul 22 2009, 03:12 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1718697"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->and finally This is pretty much exactly how I feel, but that's why I get sick of people hating on a system just because it's not the one they're using.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
And I'm asking you to realize that some people choose GNU/Linux over Windows for technical reasons based on their need, such as old hardware, and some do for other reasons. I'm not trying to convert you to Linux; I just hope that you see the reasons why some people do.
This isn't what I'm saying aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa
Why do you keep going back to this? Someone earlier called Windows redundant and I asked them to explain themself. Someone countered with "Windows is redundant because Microsoft is bad." Do you see what my problem is? No-one is addressing what I'm asking. I don't want some BS little "Linux conversion" because I already use Linux quite happily. This machine is a Vista/Gentoo dual booter, and I use both quite a lot. Downstairs I have a Fedora server, running on old (2002) hardware. I do not need converting. Linux is nothing to do with my question here. Seriously, why does no-one answer this? Someone goes "Windows is redundant" right here:
<!--quoteo(post=1716836:date=Jul 11 2009, 09:00 AM:name=borsuk)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (borsuk @ Jul 11 2009, 09:00 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1716836"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->And amazingly, some people don't want a redundant operating system like Windows.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->this^
I was directly addressing THAT GUY and everyone leaps in thinking "Oh God he's asking someone to explain themselves ZEALOT MODE ACTIVATE -- Microsoft BAD Linux GREAT Open Source NOT EVIL HURHURHUR." Every time someone argues and mentions Linux and/or the Browser War I have to wring my hands and curse peoples' refusal to address the question. I feel like I'm in an American political debate and just asked a candidate their stance on abortion or something. The way people will argue any topic other than "what makes Windows 'redundant'?" Please someone just say <b>something</b> relevant I'm getting sceptical that anyone here besides locallyunscene knows what they're talking about, even if he has been focusing on a tangent.
2: profuse, lavish
3: serving as a duplicate for preventing failure of an entire system (as a spacecraft) upon failure of a single component<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->re⋅dun⋅dant  [ri-duhn-duhnt]
–adjective
1. characterized by verbosity or unnecessary repetition in expressing ideas; prolix: a redundant style.
2. being in excess; exceeding what is usual or natural: a redundant part.
3. having some unusual or extra part or feature.
4. characterized by superabundance or superfluity: lush, redundant vegetation.
5. Engineering.
a. (of a structural member) not necessary for resisting statically determined stresses.
b. (of a structure) having members designed to resist other than statically determined stresses; hyperstatic.
c. noting a complete truss having additional members for resisting eccentric loads. Compare complete (def. 8), incomplete (def. 3).
d. (of a device, circuit, computer system, etc.) having excess or duplicate parts that can continue to perform in the event of malfunction of some of the parts.
6. Linguistics. characterized by redundancy; predictable.
7. Computers. containing more bits or characters than are required, as a parity bit inserted for checking purposes.
8. Chiefly British. removed or laid off from a job.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<!--QuoteBegin-Wikipedia+--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Wikipedia)</div><div class='quotemain'><!--QuoteEBegin-->The state of being redundant or excessive; a needless repetition in language; excessive wordiness. Over and over, as in the same style or manner.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Windows is only redundant if it does everything the same as everyone else. Or, more strictly, it has the same characteristics as another OS. Redundant also carries the connotation of doing it worse or superfluously, not necessary to exist.
However, while the "basic" functionality of all OSs are essentially the same by creating a platform for applications and giving access to the hardware, each one has its own quirks and nuances. Also, different developers tend to build on one OS or the other (although there are many movements to change this), making what you can run on your OS different between OSs. Also, optimizations for certain features can be better or worse between systems.
So, in a strict sense, I don't see how Windows is redundant.
...ah, but that'd require research and/or knowledge.
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->I'm a big believer in "technology over politics". I don't care who it comes from, as long as there are solid reasons for the code, and as long as we don't have to worry about licensing etc issues.
I may make jokes about Microsoft at times, but at the same time, I think the Microsoft hatred is a disease. I believe in open development, and that very much involves not just making the source open, but also not shutting other people and companies out.
There are 'extremists' in the free software world, but that's one major reason why I don't call what I do 'free software' any more. I don't want to be associated with the people for whom it's about exclusion and hatred."
- Linus Torvalds, creator of Linux<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
There are fanatics in the world for everything. Don't mistake caution for hatred though.
Well, I'll make an exception for a few of you. You're on my extra hate list.
...ah, but that'd require research and/or knowledge.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Who said anything about Android?
Chrome OS is gonna be a bootable browser. And all the application will be running off a website. I could imagine the only way to implement NS to work with Chrome OS is to have it run in JAVA on a website.
P.S it was a joke. (In case you didn't realize. Well why would you, Mr "know it all")
Take your OS talk somewhere else. This topic is solely about Linux possibilities for NS2.
The word Microsoft shouldn't be appearing at all.
Chrome OS is gonna be a bootable browser. And all the application will be running off a website. I could imagine the only way to implement NS to work with Chrome OS is to have it run in JAVA on a website.
P.S it was a joke. (In case you didn't realize. Well why would you, Mr "know it all")<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Chrome OS is a Linux distro, it's designed to primarily run off the net but even if it didn't natively have the ability to install applications it could easily be added. The only major difference is the lack of the X Window System. Java is not the only language ever; it's the language for Android apps but I highly doubt that non-ARM architechture OS will not include more.
<b>Linux users are about 5% of Quake Live players. </b>
Says ttimo, an id Software employee. <a href="http://ttimo.vox.com/library/post/id-software-and-linux.html" target="_blank">http://ttimo.vox.com/library/post/id-software-and-linux.html</a>
This is the most accurate estimate of Linux gamers so far, I think. Especially when it comes to FPS games.
Things can be very different for other game types. Mystic Mine is a 'for the whole family' kind of game, played with a single key.
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Recently I got interviewed by Linux Gaming News about my indie game Mystic Mine, and one of the questions was how many Linux copies I sold. I looked into it and saw that I sell the most copies for Mac OS X, then for Linux, and the least for Windows. I didn’t make much of it, because as an indie game developer it’s easier to get noticed on Mac OS X or Linux than on Windows. And selling games is all about exposure. But after people started to ask questions on this, I looked further into it, and what I discovered really surprised me.
(...)
I released Mystic Mine the 3rd of February 2009, so currently there is 7 months of statistical data.
(...)
So I got 40.29% visitors using Windows, 36.30% using Mac and 22.58% using Linux. Nothing special with these figures, because it’s easier to get Mac or Linux exposure, but there are still a lot more Windows users.
But if you look at my sales, that’s quite a different story:
* Mac OS X: 42.72%
* Linux: 33.98%
* Windows: 23.30%
(...)
As you can see Linux is way up there, which is quite a surprise to say the least. For every 232 Linux visitors I get on my website, one of them buys my game. If you compare that to windows users, I need 526 of them to get a sale. For Mac OS X it’s 256. So who would have thought that Linux users are the most eager to buy an indie game? Certainly not me.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<a href="http://www.koonsolo.com/news/?p=33" target="_blank">http://www.koonsolo.com/news/?p=33</a>
<b>Linux users are about 5% of Quake Live players. </b><!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
How many Quake Live players are there though? 5% sounds huge but 5% of 100 isn't a lot, just as a quick inaccurate example to prove a point.
I hope NS2 gets a decent Linux release, it looks fricken awesome!
How many there are I don't know. But if you bothered to check the link I provided in the same post, you'd see "which is in line with the company's previous releases".