Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Steam On Linux For March Drops Down To 1.00%

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #21
    Endpoint Linux distros are a harsh environment for third-party software. I liked what LSB was going for, but that was a solution for a different time.

    I think Windows and MacOS each hit it out of the park (in different directions) with their approaches to this. Windows (for the most part) kept supported legacy runtimes to satisfy applications via WinSxS, and MacOS forced everyone onto a smaller set of APIs that they closely shepherded and evolved. On the Linux side, the Kernel is tremendously stable, but the middle layer between that and your app is twenty constantly moving targets. We're basically throwing away a lot of the effort made on the kernel side to keep things stable.

    I think GNU/Linux needs a periodic LTS standard runtime released that can be used by the Flatpaks and Snaps of the world. Some way to say 'Hey, I'm targeting Linux 2022' where Fedora, RHEL, Debian, Ubuntu, can still have their 'native' system, but there's an option for third-party software to call up to a complete and stable stack that's uniform across distributions. I also don't think it would only end up running just on Linux, we know Windows would want to be able to call to this, and so would new projects that might run on L4, or Fuchsia, Mach, BSD, or HURD. Third-party developers could target a standard Linux release that would be available across most of the computing ecosystem, and it would be up to distros and alternative OS developers to figure out how to make their products cope with executing the runtime environment.

    Comment


    • #22
      Originally posted by birdie View Post
      AMD despite being worshipped by open source fans is nowhere to be seen.

      I mean there's RX 580 at the 18th position which is just a joke.
      <snip>
      I guess only the Linux community buys AMD cards.
      I use only Radeon cards precisely for this reason: I can't stand having to faff about with kernel stuff and out-of-tree drivers/DKMS every time I update the kernel--which happens often on Fedora. Pure gamers will likely not be using Linux at all because it's difficult to play all AAA titles in Linux. So if you're not a hardcore gamer, and you prefer Linux, then it's just a headache to run an nVidia card when you don't really have any benefit from it.

      And I have an RX 580, because it has decent performance and only cost me 2500 SEK (hehehe makes me smile every time I think about it considering current prices). I play Dying Light, Doom Eternal & Street Fighter V at the moment, and whilst they are not the latest and greatest, I can still find plenty of games that work on Linux, that I like to play. Steam Play (Proton) has been an absolute godsend, and not that i've read anything about it's impact, but my personal opinion is that the ability to play games on Linux has increased dramatically since Proton was released.

      Regarding survey Linux usage, in my own case it's gone from 0 to 100% in the last few months, and i've spent several hours per week playing steam games in the native Linux client. I get the feeling that those usage numbers can be taken with a pinch of salt when it comes to desktop users. A better indicator of gaming on Linux would be to publish how many people "regularly" play games in the native Steam client who use Linux, so let's say 500,000 people use Linux; what percentage of those are playing Steam, because to just say 1% of the total Steam user base is using Linux is not-so-slightly skewed data.

      Comment


      • #23
        Originally posted by mangeek View Post
        Some way to say 'Hey, I'm targeting Linux 2022' where Fedora, RHEL, Debian, Ubuntu, can still have their 'native' system, but there's an option for third-party software to call up to a complete and stable stack that's uniform across distributions.
        Like, let's just say that we know that the '2022 Linux' runtime is a build of Kernel 5.15, LibSDL2, Gnome 40, GTK 3 and 4, QT 5 and 6, Python 3, and a slew of other base packages that are way more than a 'Core22' snap, but way less than a full distro. That's a valid target that my own flatpak-type thing can target indefinitely, and when the support for the packages in it fades, it's still available in 2032, but in an 'at your own risk' way. It would probably be a huge blob that was formed by a consortium of the leading vendors, but they'd be scoped-in to just deciding what was needed as a runtime that enabled minimal third-party fuss, not a fully-functional system.

        Comment


        • #24
          Originally posted by Setif
          Ubuntu 20.04.4 LTS 13.18% +13.18%
          Manjaro Linux 12.52% +0.44%
          Arch Linux 11.94% -0.57%
          Ubuntu 21.10 7.29% +0.08%
          Linux Mint 20.3 6.55% +0.26%
          Pop!_OS 21.10 6.52% +0.31%
          Other 41.99% +1.32%
          The fragmentation in Linux is insane. Other == 42%
          Is the Steam runtime different between the distributios? Or what is your point?

          Comment


          • #25
            Originally posted by dlq84 View Post
            Setif the fragmantation in the car industry is insane: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Car_brands

            IT'S CALLED CHOICE
            Yep, and seats, engine, suspension, etc. only fits to only particular model or sometimes several models belonging to one producer.

            Like in Linux .

            So, a prefer Windows, libraries, executable fits to Windows, not only to Fedora or Ubuntu .
            Last edited by HEL88; 02 April 2022, 06:52 AM.

            Comment


            • #26
              Originally posted by birdie View Post
              No longer supported Windows 7 still commands a 4.14% share, while all the Linux distros combined are less than a single percent.
              Most of the games are made for Windows if you didn't notice. However, this is changing. Most people don't understand how broken and insecure Windows is. Windows is like religion - if you're born in it, it's hard to get out, because of fear.

              Comment


              • #27
                Originally posted by Ironmask View Post
                I imagine what mostly matters is what OS a pre-built computer comes with (not just brand names, but also PC building services). I imagine most of the PC gaming market is using a pre-built of some variety or another, and they're definitely not going to touch their OS.
                I think you'll only ever see this number significantly change (going from 0.92% to 1.0% is not significant, regardless of what Michael says) if existing pre-built manufacturers, or brand new ones (like System76) start shipping Linux with their systems. And of course, that's contingent on Linux being usable at all (and largely it isn't after the package manager bricks the install, which it usually does for apt and pacman). After the graphics stack is stabilized (full Wayland adoption, the Nvidia problem is solved) and we finally kill off system-bricking package managers like apt and pacman in favor of something more stable like nix, I can begin to imagine pre-builders shipping with Linux.
                What on earth are you on about? This is a completely non-sensical comment. apt and pacman do not "brick your install". This is effectively impossible unless you try really hard to go out of your way to do something incredibly stupid like remove core system packages.

                As an aside, I'm sick and tired of people misusing the term "brick" when it comes to computing hardware. for something to be "bricked" means it is not recoverable, i.e it is now equivalent to a brick. it is physically impossible for a linux package manager to "brick" a system. The only way that could happen to a modern pc is a bios update gone wrong.

                Comment


                • #28


                  Originally posted by HEL88 View Post

                  Yep, and seats, engine, suspension, etc. only fits to only particular model or sometimes several models belonging to one producer.

                  Like in Linux .

                  So, a prefer Windows, libraries, executable fits to Windows, not only tu Fedora or Ubuntu .
                  Just Like with Linux you don't have to worry about the smallest details (libs), that's up to the distro maintainers to get right when you install stuff via the package manager. Just like parts for your car is your mechanic's job to handle (unless you really want to do it yourself, which is also fine)

                  Or you just take the buss that takes your from A -> B. Like using Flatpack, everything just works no matter your distro.


                  And the fact the survey numbers contains at least 12 different distros and my 15+ years running Linux tells me that the whole "fragmentation" argument is moot. It's something that was probably true years ago with dependency hell and what not, but today it's a myth that refuses to die.
                  Last edited by dlq84; 02 April 2022, 05:06 AM.

                  Comment


                  • #29
                    Originally posted by NobodyXu View Post

                    There's appimage, where you can run it just by one click.

                    Most websites provide Windows installer, not one click runnable exe, I think the same kind of Linux installer can be done if somebody wants to, auto invoking package managers to install stuff and install the app.
                    It's not exactly "one click" as you still have to make it executable prior to running it.
                    Some file manages do this for you but only some...

                    Comment


                    • #30
                      Originally posted by birdie View Post
                      "Windows installer"? The fuck you're talking about? MSI (Microsoft Installer) maybe? Works on every Windows version starting with Windows 98. As universal and portable as exe. It just fucking works. You don't need to run a special Windows version to be able to use it. Still, it's relatively rarely used.

                      MSI is mainly intended for large organization to deploy software using group policies. Oh, wait, there's nothing like that in Linux. No GPO, nothing, SSH into each of your workstations and run distro specific commands. Oh, crap.

                      Linux on the desktop no matter how and at what angle you're looking at it remains a crap OS. I mean literally tens of thousands of incompatible crap OSes.
                      It depends upon your point of view as to whether you think the situation is good or bad. Most enterprises try to keep their estate of desktop PCs on a single revision of Windows because of the incompatibilities between versions: someone administering Linux desktop PCs would do the same, choosing a specific distribution and version. As for SSHing into each desktop: that went out with the ark. At the very simplest level it is easy enough to run a periodic cron job on each desktop to check a central repository of scripts and execute relevant ones; or run them at boot and/or user account login. Of course, there are system management daemons and a choice of software for implementing policies and reporting back: and plenty of home-grown stuff. It's just done in a different way to Microsoft. I won't say better or worse, just different.

                      And, of course, enterprise end-users shouldn't be installing software. Most enterprise end-users can't run MSI because they don't have admin access. Large enterprises have teams of people responsible for packaging up install to end users via management software, which isn't so different to Linux packages installed by a privileged daemon or cron job from a local repository.

                      Complaining that Linux is different to what you are used to in Windows won't get you much sympathy when there are plenty of Linux admins that administer large estates.



                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X