Page 2 of 11 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 104

Thread: Valve Reveals More Steam Linux Distribution Details

  1. #11
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    159

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by r1348 View Post
    I'm rather bothered by the amount of Ubuntu users out there.
    Don't forget that Ubuntu was the distro to have the first official support from steam, so might have quite a lot of newly converted or people simply trying that went for it, due to that. I am also pretty sure steam is unable to make the difference between Ubuntu and and official derivative like Kubuntu for example, which might inflate the number.

  2. #12
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Kingston, Jamaica
    Posts
    300

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by r1348 View Post
    I'm rather bothered by the amount of Ubuntu users out there.
    Why would you be bothered by that?

  3. #13
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    221

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by duby229 View Post
    nah... I say let em come... The bigger the userbase the better. Even if the usebase is completely retarded it doesnt matter, they can use their distro and we can use ours.
    You shouldn't imply that Ubuntu users are retarded... In any case, Ubuntu desktop (i.e. Unity) has had a lot of bad press, but Ubuntu as a distribution (which is I assume what's being reported here, since there are no numbers for Kubuntu, etc.) is still quite reasonable.

  4. #14
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    1,024

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Cyborg16 View Post
    Looks like 64-bit is the standard by now. Can we not just forget about 32-bit for AMD/Intel (finally)?
    It's somewhat annoying to me that the major distros even keep making 32-bit x86 releases. I was likewise annoyed that Windows didn't go 64-bit only by Win8, or even as far ago as Vista. OSX is the only major OS that only ships a 64-bit only OS these days; a facet of their control of the hardware. Still, I can't imagine a sizable portion of users are upgrading to the latest Fedora/Ubuntu or Windows on ancient hardware; I'm sure it happens (someone here will claim they do it, surely), but happens enough to be worth caring about? Especially on Linux where specialist "you suck and need new hardware" distros exist and more will arise if necessary. There's no strong reason to develop, test, and distribute x86-32 builds of Fedora or Ubuntu anymore. Likewise on Windows; users on old hardware and upgrading to the latest OS are statistical anomalies. The markets where ancient hardware is common are just pirating XP anyways; fuck 'em. Hopefully there's some market research somewhere to prove me wrong and make the situation less ridiculous.

  5. #15
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    ฿ 16LDJ6Hrd1oN3nCoFL7BypHSEYL84ca1JR
    Posts
    1,049

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Cyborg16 View Post
    but Ubuntu as a distribution (which is I assume what's being reported here, since there are no numbers for Kubuntu, etc.) is still quite reasonable.
    Try installing 32 bit boost libs in a 64 bit ubuntu. That's their multi arch support. (On archlinux it simply goes in /usr/lib32 and it works.)

  6. #16
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    135

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Cyborg16 View Post
    Looks like 64-bit is the standard by now. Can we not just forget about 32-bit for AMD/Intel (finally)?
    Netbooks...
    Almost all up until quite recently, and even now a significant proportion of the damn things.
    Admittedly a lot have PowerVR graphics and are a nuisance to use Linux on anyway, but there are still a lot of potential and actual users there.

    Also, there are still a fair few Pentium M laptops (and some P4 desktops, although I haven't seen many recently) in existence - mostly with XP*, and not really suited to Vista or Win7 but quite happy with some XFCE/LXDE distro. Quite a lot of those are owned by students etc, who are much more likely to be using Linux than your average PC owner*.

    *NB: Such statements are based on what I see as a permanent resident of a university town in the UK, and might not properly represent global trends. I don't see why they shouldn't, though.

  7. #17
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    1,353

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Cyborg16 View Post
    You shouldn't imply that Ubuntu users are retarded... In any case, Ubuntu desktop (i.e. Unity) has had a lot of bad press, but Ubuntu as a distribution (which is I assume what's being reported here, since there are no numbers for Kubuntu, etc.) is still quite reasonable.
    Please don't misunderstand me, I'm not calling Ubuntu users retarded. Instead I'm saying that a certain percentage of any userbase is going to be retarded, and lets face it, most of that group will be using Ubuntu.

    I guess as a function of its target market it simply attracts a larger percentage of retarded users than other distributions. Before Ubuntu it was Mandrake. It simply is a matter of what retarded people think is going to be the easiest to use. And I'm not saying that retarded users are bad... As a matter of fact I welcome them. The bigger the userbase the better, retarded or not.

    I will stick to the distro I prefer and their presence will attract more software development which I can benefit from and I still won't have to deal with any of them. It isnt like Windows where you only get what you're given... I can use what I prefer and they can use what they prefer.... And in the end when software and games are made available that wouldnt have otherwise we all benefit.
    Last edited by duby229; 03-17-2013 at 07:08 PM.

  8. #18
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    142

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by schmidtbag View Post
    Anyone else bothered about the amount of 32 bit users out there?
    What's the benefit of 64bit if you have less than 4GB RAM on your system?

  9. #19
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    1,353

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Nuc!eoN View Post
    What's the benefit of 64bit if you have less than 4GB RAM on your system?
    That isnt the real question though.... Heres the real one....

    What's the benefit of sticking to 32bit when a 64bit multilib system can still support 32bit?

    Sooner or later all systems will have more than 4GB of RAM. It really isnt the larger registers that matter, in some cases it hurts, but it is the number of registers that do. A multilib system that can use either 32bit or 64bit depending on whether or not it makes sense is going to be a good idea even if you don't have 4GB.

  10. #20
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    240

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jayrulez View Post
    Why would you be bothered by that?
    I don't like where Ubuntu is going, and a sizeable part of linux users with it.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •