191–200 of 301 posts
Right now the only thing keeping me from running linux full time is the Adobe Master Collection (PS AI LR ID AE...)
Some of it runs okay under Wine, some not. A shame, I wish a startup would try and tackle the Adobe Collection at some point, but I guess the capital requirements and network effects are too great :(
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Nonsense. There are, at best, a handful of desktop environments targeted at daily desktop users: Unity, KDE, Gnome-Shell, maybe LXDE/Razor if you're being generous. I've love to hear a single specific complaint about an experience you had with KDE that isn't "it was different from windows", especially given that it's the closest to the Windows daily interactions.
Unity, KDE, LXDE, XFCE, Cinnamon, Mate, Gnome 3, and I have tried to just go with openbox and Tint2. First - it is different than windows is absolutely valid complaint. Having to tweak muscle memory is highly unpleasant. A single problem with KDE - windows key cannot be mapped to show the start menu without extension. Second is that all the taskbars that I found for it were just worse than the windows one in multimon…
AFAIK, that's an X limitation. Already fixed in KDE5/KF5/PW2. Very annoying though, I've retrained myself for Super+Space as my hotkey instead.
>Second is that all the taskbars that I found for it were just worse than the windows one in multimonitor setup or ugly.
Hm, not sure what's up there. My KDE setup is identical to my work Windows setup. Taskbar on each monitor with "start" menu button and the icon-only task manager. Then the panel on my main monitor has my sys tray. Other than obvious icon differences, it's damn near identical to Windows (at least the way 8.1 does the taskbar on all monitors).
>Alt+Tab worked inconsistently
o_0 in KDE? KDE's default alt-tab is identical to Windows's. In Gnome-shell, it acts like OS X's Cmd-Tab. But either way, you can tweak the window switcher to work exactly the way you like- include all windows, only restored windows, switch between apps or windows, etc, etc.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Wayland is being developed to specifically replace X11 the latter being based on antiquated principles.
You've just given me a fact I'm already well aware of ("Wayland is being developed...") and then restated that X11 is antiquated, but you've never given me a reason why you think that. Do you actually know, or are you just repeating something you read somewhere but didn't really understand?
Clearly you're passionate about X11 and I would like to hear why it is not antiquated.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Ubuntu is just a buggy distro, I used it once upon a time, it's simply not stable. Fedora is just a buggy distro, I used it once upon a time, it's simply not stable. Arch is just a buggy distro, I used it once upon a time, it's simply not stable. We could play this game all day to make stinkytaco's point.
You're right, any bleeding edge Linux can be unstable. But I'd put an app into production on any of the ones listed over Mint. Either way, the fact that Steam doesn't work on Mint is Mint's problem, not Steam's...
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6847940
"Steam is included in the Linux Mint 16 repositories and you shouldn't have issues installing it from the package manager. Or you can always "apt-get install steam". Like most Linux applications, you are better off installing the application from the package manager instead of from the upstream website."
now stop spreading FUD.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Linux has good enough binary compatibility. I have seen 32-bit applications built on RHEL 2.1 run on RHEL 5. You need the correct libraries and versions, but that's not a difficult problem to solve. See AppCafe[1] by PC-BSD. You may use it if you use plugins on FreeNAS. Lets say that you need fifteen copies of SDL installed to ensure that you can support ten years of games. This is not a problem for a Unix/Linux syst…
> You need the correct libraries and versions, but that's not a difficult problem to solve Or just ship statically linked binaries. That seems like it would be a good solution for games.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Gaming doesn't work on OS X because it has too small a user base, but Linux's user base is much smaller. There's an estimated 20 million Ubuntu users worldwide, probably another 10 million or so of other Linux distros. Not to mention, Linux (and thus Steam OS) is easily installed. Adoption isn't a problem. Gaming on OSX doesn't work as well as on a PC because you can't put OSX on custom hardware. > As an aside, Lin…
I'm curious what the user base of gaming focused users in for linux world wide. Linux tends to attract developers rather than users who spend a great deal of money on their gaming hobby. Perhaps I am wrong. Don't get me wrong, I'd love this to work, but it seems like a bit of a stretch to say it will work better than a platform that is already successful at getting people to spend money on games (see Mac App Store, i…
Nice Ad Hominem [1] you threw out there.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Windows comes installed on almost every PC sold. Linux does not. Therefore more work is required to use Linux. Keep in mind that most people who play games (and I'm not talking about Angry Birds or Facebook games but people who use Steam) tend to build their own PCs. And installing Linux is just as easy as installing Windows, if not easier (you won't have to go on a driver hunt most of the time for instance).
> Keep in mind that most people who play games (and I'm not talking about Angry Birds or Facebook games but people who use Steam) tend to build their own PCs. Do you have a source for this?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm curious what the user base of gaming focused users in for linux world wide. Linux tends to attract developers rather than users who spend a great deal of money on their gaming hobby. Perhaps I am wrong. Don't get me wrong, I'd love this to work, but it seems like a bit of a stretch to say it will work better than a platform that is already successful at getting people to spend money on games (see Mac App Store, i…
>This coming from the guy who just told someone their problem is that they are running Linux Mint... Nice Ad Hominem [1] you threw out there. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> I'm curious what the user base of gaming focused users in for linux world wide. Linux tends to attract developers rather than users who spend a great deal of money on their gaming hobby. Perhaps I am wrong. I'd wager a good portion of Linux devs are gamers, and likely just dual-boot, have a console, an iPad, etc... Seeing as how the barrier to using Linux is lower than either Windows or OSX, it doesn't really matte…
Barrier to using Linux is not lower than Windows. Windows comes installed on almost every PC sold. Linux does not. Therefore more work is required to use Linux. I love Linux, but "if a program works on every single other distro.." is disingenuous. I have not once had 100% success with Linux on initial install. There has always been something that needed to be tweaked (usually sound or graphics). No, Windows isn't 100…
A standard Kubuntu (or Chakra) install on any Intel/AMD PC made before June will likely work without hiccups or missing hardware. Most distributions include an app to specifically detect/install proprietary drivers (Ubuntu uses Jockey). A browsing of Phoronix.com will provide you with benchmarks showing the NVIDIA/AMD/Intel drivers running neck-and-neck with Windows. But hey, let's not let the truth get in the way of your FUD.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Are you joking? Because even $2000 iMacs come with mobile GPUs. Not to mention CPUs that cannot be overclocked etc. That's comparable to a high-end gaming laptop, not a PC. And what's wrong with high-end gaming laptops? My $1000 MacBook Pro has played everything I've thrown at it acceptably well, and it's not even particularly high-end. It's no longer the mid-90s, when you needed a new $2000 rig every year to keep…
There's nothing wrong with gaming laptops, it's just that both their performance and the experience they provide pales in comparison to a PC. (A PC that costs less, mind you.) I mean, you cannot realistically say that you can have an immersive experience on a 15 inch, 1600x900 monitor when it comes to graphically intensive games. Also, with CPU bound games like Arma overclocking can result in a difference of 15-20 fp…
And yes, I very much can have an immersive experience on my 15" display, as can many other people. According to the Valve hardware survey, only 32.61% are running at 1080p; most of the rest have to do with less. Giant monitors aren't as ubiquitous as you might think.