id Software: Linux Hasn't Produced Positive Results

[sgtGarcia]

I think there is truth in this. Unix end-users are too cheap to buy software, especially when theres a usable free alternative. Where I think there is some sort of fallacy is the opinion that Windows users are any different. The majority of end users I know will happily pirate, whilst some others are willing to pay for software that is better than the free versions, or does stuff they can't get for free.

You can't really make money selling browsers, utilities, or anything much more on the PC. You may be able to make some money selling software such as Office, Photoshops, and theres a lot of money business solutions, but I can't imagine the typical end user spends a lot on software and I'd imagine that market is typically shriking. Games are an exception though, and theres no reason to think they wouldn't be an exception on *nix.

The problem is to hit the right section.
Nero removed it's Nero Burning Software for Linux, why? Probably nobody bought it, cause there's already K3B ( the best IMHO ), GnomeBaker, Brasero. K3B is full fledged soft, so why anyone would want to by Nero instead.

I'm waiting for BluRay player for Linux ( not like VLC, where I have to screw around with keys & other stuff, mostly not working ). Really I'm willing to pay. Great picture, 5.1 24/96 sound - I would buy it - but there is none.

Another Office package - hmm.. if it's faster & better than Libre/Open Office - than MAYBE ( office is not in my primary use ), but to pay for something same or worse then stuff I can get for free - I'm not an idiot. I don't need 24h/day support.

So calling Me cheap - it's not fair, I'm just not dumb, saving money ( hard-earned money ) isn't cheap, it's smart.

Software devs need to give Me something I need, not something they think I need ( or better I should need or I don't need but I should buy it anyway).

[ownagefool]

The problem is to hit the right section.
Nero removed it's Nero Burning Software for Linux, why? Probably nobody bought it, cause there's already K3B ( the best IMHO ), GnomeBaker, Brasero. K3B is full fledged soft, so why anyone would want to by Nero instead.

I'm waiting for BluRay player for Linux ( not like VLC, where I have to screw around with keys & other stuff, mostly not working ). Really I'm willing to pay. Great picture, 5.1 24/96 sound - I would buy it - but there is none.

Another Office package - hmm.. if it's faster & better than Libre/Open Office - than MAYBE ( office is not in my primary use ), but to pay for something same or worse then stuff I can get for free - I'm not an idiot. I don't need 24h/day support.

So calling Me cheap - it's not fair, I'm just not dumb, saving money ( hard-earned money ) isn't cheap, it's smart.

Software devs need to give Me something I need, not something they think I need ( or better I should need or I don't need but I should buy it anyway).

Actually nero is another example of bundling / advertising. Its a relic and not really needed even in windows land. At one point or another, one of the less awful free alternatives will become popular, and that'll be the end of that.

Office probably isn't a good example. Libre, is arguably on par on certian aspects, but not the entire suite. It may be good enough for a lot of home users, but for buisness use, I suspect its a little sub par. Thats likely to change, but today I'd probably be willing to pay for an Linux version if office to avoid those issues if I needed the software.

The blueray example is interesting, because whilst part of me thinks I'd pay for the software, another part of me dislikes a standard which dictates a requirment to pay for keys and such. Come on, its a freaking media standard, a Linux user may be more likely to ideologically object to such a thing.

You shouldn't be insulted over the term cheap though, it's just a tag to say those people can't make money from you. It may be slightly derogatory, but I still believe the important distinction is that we're not very different from Windows users. There are markets where we'll pay, just like anyone else. There are those we won't, just like everyone else too (except iPhone users, apparently they'll buy anything).

[rapscalliot]

Carmack's an idiot

Carmack is an idiot and I feel for the Linux developer who left his company, more than likely due to the lack of support in being the sole dev in there. So...Carmack doesn't spend enough effort in developing for Linux; hides the game download availability to some godforsaken page on the internet that you can't find publicly; then when the game falls through on the Linux community, you cite lack of support from the users and claim that it is unprofitable?? He basically dug his own hole, fell in it, then wondered where the hole came from. That level of stupidity can only be rewarded in failure.

The reason why we, the Linux users, are in such small numbers in the game market share is because nearly nobody is developing games for Linux! Even if we say we are Linux users and play these games on Linux, we had to buy the Windows version of it and then use Wine to actually play it! So of course, the market share is in favor of Windows! I think that Linux market share would gain some ground not only because the game companies would develop for our system, but also provide a survey that allows you to choose from Linux among the choices to see where the game is actually going to be played [not just what system it was made for].

[uid313]

Carmack is an idiot and I feel for the Linux developer who left his company, more than likely due to the lack of support in being the sole dev in there. So...Carmack doesn't spend enough effort in developing for Linux; hides the game download availability to some godforsaken page on the internet that you can't find publicly; then when the game falls through on the Linux community, you cite lack of support from the users and claim that it is unprofitable?? He basically dug his own hole, fell in it, then wondered where the hole came from. That level of stupidity can only be rewarded in failure.

John Carmack is anything but an idiot. He is a pioneer of computer graphics and invented many things. Nowadays he does rocket science for his aerospace company.

The guy is ingenious.
John Carmack is the guy who has made the most for Linux gaming of anyone.
Thanks to his generous contribution to the open source community of several successful commercial games engines we have games such as Warsow, Alien Arena, Nexuiz, Tremulous, etc.

The reason why we, the Linux users, are in such small numbers in the game market share is because nearly nobody is developing games for Linux! Even if we say we are Linux users and play these games on Linux, we had to buy the Windows version of it and then use Wine to actually play it! So of course, the market share is in favor of Windows! I think that Linux market share would gain some ground not only because the game companies would develop for our system, but also provide a survey that allows you to choose from Linux among the choices to see where the game is actually going to be played [not just what system it was made for].

Bullshit!

The reason is that Linux is heavily fragmented with a zillion of Linux distributions and package management systems, not to mention ABI breakage. Well, I guess you could statically compile everything not using shared libraries and ship it in a tarball.

The reason is that Linux users are computer scientists, engineers, hackers, programmers, and geeks.
Gamers and ordinary people don't use Linux, they use Windows.

Maybe some clueless Windows lusers don't know how to pirate so much. But you can be sure that every Linux user knows how to pirate shit. Many even how to crack it and write their own keylogger.

Release games for Linux?
- Then users will bitch and whine at you cuz it don't it don't work on their obscure distro.
- Will bitch at whine at you cuz graphics glitches and crashes cuz AMD drivers suck.
- Will bitch and whine about it being proprietary software and DRM and you being evil.

How many percent of people use Linux? 1%
How many percent of Linux users are gamers? 1% of above
How many percent of Linux gamers are willing to pay for your game? 1% of above

You will waste a shitload of money getting the game to Linux and then get 2 sales from Linux gamers.

The best thing a commercial software vendor can do is to ignore Linux.
The Linux community is a vocal minority and its no money to be made selling software on Linux.

[entropy]

JC is not an idiot.

But this whole staged keynote thing is embarrassing to the bone and I actually really feel sorry for him.
It's not that he wasn't an excellent technical person but he is not playing an influential role anymore since long.
He tries very hard, obviously, but times are over for this kind of one-man show.
I'm pretty sure Valve and EPIC, for instance, have staff members at R&D with equal or even higher competence
but nobody has really heard of them.

This feels so 90's, really. :/

[sgtGarcia]

OT:

This feels so 90's, really. :/

I like 90's At least music. (( d-.-b ))

Back on track:

Carmack is not an idiot in terms of technology, but in terms of marketing/business I think He's not the right person to listen.

[gamerk2]

Software devs need to give Me something I need, not something they think I need ( or better I should need or I don't need but I should buy it anyway).

As a software dev: I exist to make my company [and by extension, myself] money. I can't compete against free, but "good enough" software packages, so I don't develop for linux.

Shocking, I know.

[johnc]

As a software dev: I exist to make my company [and by extension, myself] money. I can't compete against free, but "good enough" software packages, so I don't develop for linux.

Shocking, I know.

That's precisely how I feel.

Though Windows isn't too much different at this point.

[Ferdinand]

As a software dev: I exist to make my company [and by extension, myself] money. I can't compete against free, but "good enough" software packages, so I don't develop for linux.

Shocking, I know.

I wonder if a good store could change that. There are a lot of thing in linux that could be better. If you as a software dev can fix that with either a patch or an app you could sell that. If the price is right and you make it easy for both the user and the developer...

[ownagefool]

As a software dev: I exist to make my company [and by extension, myself] money. I can't compete against free, but "good enough" software packages, so I don't develop for linux.

Shocking, I know.

As a software developer who develops stuff that primarily runs on Linux, I can't compete against free either. Thats why, if my company ask me to do something and I know of an existing free implementation of said thing which fits the bill, I use the said implementation when possible. You're not doing anyone any favours by reinventing the wheel.

I wonder if a good store could change that. There are a lot of thing in linux that could be better. If you as a software dev can fix that with either a patch or an app you could sell that. If the price is right and you make it easy for both the user and the developer...

The problem isn't the app store, windows doesn't have an app store and people still manage to sell software there. The problem is actually writing something of merit. Software that cosmumers use is unlikely to have any merit*, thus you're going to have a hard time making money on any platform unless your app stands out or, at the very least, has a niche.