linux, the very weak system for gaming

[DanLamb]

Linux and UNIX have these wonderful things called package managers. Use them. Don't re-invent the wheel by creating a Windows-esque "installer". It isn't needed or wanted on Linux. Package manager tracks the file locations, required dependencies, etc. so that end users don't have to.

Windows-esque installers are terrible. The Linux repo system works great for FOSS without DRM, but games need a high quality DRM capable app store repo.

Steam is a horrible choice: Steam involves lots of NDAs, Valve taking a massive cut of revenue, and Valve having huge say over product pricing and terms and promotions. That may be somewhat similar to offerings from Apple/Google/Sony/Microsoft, but in some ways Google/Apple do it better with zero NDAs and open pricing models to developers. I'd rather see the Google Play store extend to the desktop than Steam seize control.

The idealistic Linux types should build a more community friendly, quasi-open DRM app store repo service that is legally bound to idealistic principles like zero NDAs and a revenue neutral commitment to being a community service rather than a profit center, open APIs, community involvement, etc.

[Guest]

hi all,

why is it, that i have like 50% better average gaming perfomance in windows 7 compared to lubuntu, for example, no matter, what i do? and why is it, that you always get errors, warnings and crashes everytime you install or run something on linux? i believe it is at the time, that developers make linux a gaming plattform, that is better than windows. every year i try linux again and it makes me sick that its still trash in gaming.

this is one video, that shows, what i tried to "explain" here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sh-cnaJoGCw

It seems gaming performance is better on Linux now:

http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article&item=geforce_ubuntu14_win81&num=1

and why is it, that you always get errors, warnings and crashes everytime you install or run something on linux?

It seems someone's lying here. Why are you lying?

[mmstick]

Windows-esque installers are terrible. The Linux repo system works great for FOSS without DRM, but games need a high quality DRM capable app store repo.

Steam is a horrible choice: Steam involves lots of NDAs, Valve taking a massive cut of revenue, and Valve having huge say over product pricing and terms and promotions. That may be somewhat similar to offerings from Apple/Google/Sony/Microsoft, but in some ways Google/Apple do it better with zero NDAs and open pricing models to developers. I'd rather see the Google Play store extend to the desktop than Steam seize control.

The idealistic Linux types should build a more community friendly, quasi-open DRM app store repo service that is legally bound to idealistic principles like zero NDAs and a revenue neutral commitment to being a community service rather than a profit center, open APIs, community involvement, etc.

Developers make 3x profit from selling on Steam in comparison to selling it retail. Do you really think Valve's cut is obscenely big? What do you propose -- developers ship to Origin instead? FYI, Valve has no say in pricing, and I have no idea what you mean by NDA.

[justmy2cents]

1. Distro lifecycle. Unless you're talking about RHEL, SuSE Enterprise, or Ubuntu LTS, most desktop Linux distros have a lifespan measured in months. Typically ~1 year, sometimes not even that much. And RHEL and SuSE Enterprise are mainly targeted at the server & professional workstation market, so they have almost zero consumer market share.

which only matters if you don't distinguish between someone dedicated to single distro and someone dedicated to writing apps running everywhere. unfortunately, lots of pretender coders don't and they are usually most vocal in this department.

Writing a commercial app that links against shared libraries which have a ~1 year lifespan is insanity. The game developers end up having to package a complete runtime environment to go along with the game, or they have to re-build and re-distribute the game for every distro version bump. Both are a lot of extra work, coding, logistics, and tech-support, that isn't required on Windows or OSX.

most libraries don't break api/abi. unless it is called gtk3. but, as far as packaging goes, i found it takes me the least time to build linux packages, since i simply run adapted script at end of build chain. still haven't found anything near as simple on windows. osx on the other hand requires exact specific folder layout which is a pain if you don't work with apple tools

2. Software version differences, and packaging differences. Ubuntu uses kernel x.x.x and libc x.x.x but Fedora uses y.y.y and y.y.y and SuSE uses z.z.z. Either you target a single distro and lose market share, or you spend a large amount of time building and testing against many different constantly changing OS versions. Plus the packaging differences, .deb, .rpm, tarball, etc. These are all headaches that one doesn't have to deal with on Windows or OSX.

targeting single distro is only case of distro maintainers or people who don't realize how to make your app work everywhere. 2nd ones should never be allowed to develop

talking about linking against specific version of lib/kernel if you talk about application development is nothing but moronic... unless you need some old version where you're the one supplying it.

http://www.ibm.com/developerworks/library/l-lpic1-v3-102-3/

read this, it provides decent information on how wrong you are

[DanLamb]

Developers make 3x profit from selling on Steam in comparison to selling it retail. Do you really think Valve's cut is obscenely big? What do you propose -- developers ship to Origin instead? FYI, Valve has no say in pricing, and I have no idea what you mean by NDA.

You are arguing for Steam in that they have more muscle and clout, not that they have more community friendly policies.

Apple's App Store, Google Play, and Microsoft's Windows App Store all publish their publishing policies and revenue split model directly on their public web site:

http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/windows/apps/hh694058.aspx

https://developer.apple.com/programs/ios/distribute.html

https://support.google.com/googleplay/android-developer/answer/112622?hl=en

Steam does not. Steam is the less open and less friendly to the community than the other three.

[edmon]

Actually, yes there is one very good reason why games don't run well on Linux, and why game developers don't want to spend the time developing for Linux. Two reasons actually, although they're related.

1. Distro lifecycle. Unless you're talking about RHEL, SuSE Enterprise, or Ubuntu LTS, most desktop Linux distros have a lifespan measured in months. Typically ~1 year, sometimes not even that much. And RHEL and SuSE Enterprise are mainly targeted at the server & professional workstation market, so they have almost zero consumer market share.

Writing a commercial app that links against shared libraries which have a ~1 year lifespan is insanity. The game developers end up having to package a complete runtime environment to go along with the game, or they have to re-build and re-distribute the game for every distro version bump. Both are a lot of extra work, coding, logistics, and tech-support, that isn't required on Windows or OSX.

2. Software version differences, and packaging differences. Ubuntu uses kernel x.x.x and libc x.x.x but Fedora uses y.y.y and y.y.y and SuSE uses z.z.z. Either you target a single distro and lose market share, or you spend a large amount of time building and testing against many different constantly changing OS versions. Plus the packaging differences, .deb, .rpm, tarball, etc. These are all headaches that one doesn't have to deal with on Windows or OSX.

7.0 wheezy May 4th 2013

6.0 squeeze February 6th 2011

5.0 lenny February 14th 2009

4.0 etch Apr 8th 2007

3.1 sarge June 6th 2005

It look like Debinan GNU/Linux have same life span as MS Windows - almost exactly 2 years.

Windows 95 24 August 1995 4.00
Windows NT 4.0 24 August 1996 NT 4.0
Windows 98 25 June 1998 4.10
Windows 2000 17 February 2000 NT 5.0
Windows ME 14 September 2000 4.90
Windows XP 25 October 2001 NT 5.1

little diffrence 'couse they didn't predict ANdrod
but again

Windows Vista 30 January 2007 NT 6.0
Windows 7 22 October 2009 NT 6.1
Windows 8 26 October 2012 NT 6.2
Windows 8.1 18 October 2013 NT 6.3

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=awY1MRlMKMc

[finalzone]

2. Software version differences, and packaging differences. Ubuntu uses kernel x.x.x and libc x.x.x but Fedora uses y.y.y and y.y.y and SuSE uses z.z.z. Either you target a single distro and lose market share, or you spend a large amount of time building and testing against many different constantly changing OS versions. Plus the packaging differences, .deb, .rpm, tarball, etc. These are all headaches that one doesn't have to deal with on Windows or OSX.

Tarball is the most common source package that produce all packaging difference with the right tools. openSuse has Open Build Service that makes packages for all major distributions including Fedora (which is aiming a providing a better tools of third parties with the Fedora.next project phase). If Opera, a closed source software company can release all version of packaging, why not mainstream?

[DanLamb]

Actually, yes there is one very good reason why games don't run well on Linux, and why game developers don't want to spend the time developing for Linux. Two reasons actually, although they're related.

1. Distro lifecycle. Unless you're talking about RHEL, SuSE Enterprise, or Ubuntu LTS, most desktop Linux distros have a lifespan measured in months. Typically ~1 year, sometimes not even that much. And RHEL and SuSE Enterprise are mainly targeted at the server & professional workstation market, so they have almost zero consumer market share.

Writing a commercial app that links against shared libraries which have a ~1 year lifespan is insanity. The game developers end up having to package a complete runtime environment to go along with the game, or they have to re-build and re-distribute the game for every distro version bump. Both are a lot of extra work, coding, logistics, and tech-support, that isn't required on Windows or OSX.

2. Software version differences, and packaging differences. Ubuntu uses kernel x.x.x and libc x.x.x but Fedora uses y.y.y and y.y.y and SuSE uses z.z.z. Either you target a single distro and lose market share, or you spend a large amount of time building and testing against many different constantly changing OS versions. Plus the packaging differences, .deb, .rpm, tarball, etc. These are all headaches that one doesn't have to deal with on Windows or OSX.

I just bought Humble Bundle 9. Every game runs natively on Linux. Every one uses the Unity engine and offers a Linux .zip/.tar.gz download with all .so libraries included. Wakfu uses an embedded Java to similar effect. FTL is a C game that runs natively on Linux.

None of these games have the issues described above. They all work cross distribution and cross version without problem. They are just Linux binaries with included .so shared libraries.

[187k4]

The only reason

Thye only reason is because devlepors atrn't programming for linux they are all targeting windows.

[mmstick]

Thye only reason is because devlepors atrn't programming for linux they are all targeting windows.

They are programming for Linux now. In the end, it doesn't matter who you target since code can easily be OS-agnostic if you choose your middleware and libraries wisely. Even if you didn't, it's trivial to replace them.