Introducing the Steambox console, running Linux...
It does make sense that Valve would be looking outside of the Apple and Microsoft, given those companies' ever-increasing desire to lock down and control their platforms (Apple through arrogance, Microsoft through envy). That just doesn't bode well for third-party developers in the long run.
I kind of hope this is all a massive troll on the Phoronix guy. But either way, I'll be happy.
For basic controls, which adhere to the USB HID (human interface device) standards, there's not a great deal that could be incompatible with Linux. Pretty much any USB controller should adhere to the HID standards as a baseline, AFAIK.
You only really get in to "Windows only" territory when you're talking about having (re)programmable keys, macros, etc. They are usually enabled by custom software/drivers from the manufacturer.
The laptop I'm currently using is a Novatech gaming laptop, which I bought in early '09, just before I emigrated.
I bought it blind, on the assumption that Linux would "just work" these (those) days; which it did. The machine's still working fine, and I haven't had any memorable issues.
Hmm, well, the trackpad and it's buttons are rather sub-par on mine, but I generally use a separate keyboard and mouse anyway.
Their forums now have a Linux section too, FWIW.
I just found it an interesting coincidence that a person who dedicates a blog to FOSS would side with Microsoft.
Well, it's called "FOSS Patents", which just means it deals with the intersection of FOSS and patents. The title is pretty much neutral when it comes to indicating whether it is pro- or anti- FOSS. I would think you just assumed it would be pro- (or at least balanced), because few sites which are explicitly F(L)OSS related have an anti- leaning, and you're just naive.
One of your points is dubious, too... h.264 is easily the most prevalent form of video on the web and that is undeniable...
True; I think my response was coloured by the language in the Gizmodo article:
The patents are so fundamental that you really can't find a way around them with an alternate technology.
2. They get the definition of the acronym "FRAND" wrong ("friendly and non-discriminatory", rather than "fair, reasonable and non-discriminatory").
3. Several suppositions are stated as fact (when at least one is plainly untrue).
3. They quote "the mighty voice" of Florian Mueller as a authoritative source (alas, so do most other sites).
4. No apparent attempt at soliciting a response from Motorola or Google.
1. Google does not own Motorola Mobility. They're still waiting for three countries (China, Brazil and... Russia?) to OK the deal, before they can make it final.
1.5 Google's lawyers may have advised them to not say shit about anything until the deal is finalised.
2. Microsoft is being disingenuous, insinuating that Google would have any intention of killing "web video". After all, they are currently the largest supplier of "web video", and make good money off it.
3. As I understand it, it is only h264 at issue. Despite what the article says, there are other video formats available.
1. Motorola are one of the few companies who refused to sign up to Microsoft's "Android licensing" scheme.
2. Microsoft sued Motorola first, because of the previous item. Motorola retaliated with their own suit (which is generally how these things are done), and apparently got the upper hand (though potentially by misusing the weapons at their disposal - hence this kerfuffle)
And FWIW, the only Google response I've seen so far was little more than "we haven't seen Microsoft's complaint". Which seems about right, given that companies (especially Microsoft) generally like to FUD up the waters as much as possible, before they reveal what their actual announcement/complaint consists of (if they ever actually do so).
We see them trolling, but no-one seems to hate them.
Oh, Microsoft be hatin'. Microsoft be hatin' big time.
Read on. I won't spoil it, but a really unlikely source seems to agree with Microsoft on this
I'm not sure who you think is an "unlikely source", but if you mean Florian Mueller (of the "FOSS Patents" blog), then he's well known to pick up, and comment at length on, just about any anti-Google/Android patent news (most often just extrapolating from Microsoft press releases, IME). He gets his blog posts out first (funny that), so gets a lot of coverage.
It may also be prudent to note that he takes money from Microsoft.
I would like to hereby rename this thread: "YOBA's Google patent trolling trolling".
Even native games can have quite a high loading time, and they can read and access all that data directly on the hard drive. So I'll remain sceptical until I see network connections that have transfer rates of modern hard drives...
1. Browser cache
2. localStorage (5MB! Woo!)
For most single-player titles I don't even see any advantage of running them over the web.
Well, personally, having most of the client software already written for you, and installed on the customer's machine, is a big draw.
I see that this is not true for the last bundle, Linux sales were higher than OS X. I'm pretty sure I remember Linux sales being in last place on previous bundles, but perhaps I'm mistaken.
I'm not sure if they were sales or the revenue pie charts, but from what I remember the Linux and OSX segments have always been very close in size on all of the bundles.
Another important point, I believe, is that few serious games can stay on Linux. Indeed, I often find myself going back to my dreaded XP installation just to play a few games comfortably. Wine just doesn't cut it, even for games approaching 10 years of age!
In Wine's defence here:
1. Games which don't work in Wine well are often ones which the programmers rely on driver quirks, or uncommon functionality.
2. A 10-year-old game generally isn't considered "serious", certainly as far as revenue is concerned.
3. Your example is a game which was published by Microsoft...
Art is not strictly compatible with free culture
...which even Stallman seems to believe
I believe that his comment was something along the lines of: "a game with proprietary art is okay, as long as the source code is Free" (yeah, I haven't read the quote in a long time either). I could attempt to explain this view in terms of software being mathematics, rather than the pure expression of art, but I suspect RMS really didn't care, or at least not give much thought to, Free art, when his focus has been on software.
I personally would say that Free software is a more important consideration than Free art, though.
By porting to Linux (or Mac), a lot of time that could spent either improving the game or making money (or developing another while you're making money which you should have been doing anyway if you know anything about business) is spent on simply making sure it works on an unproven platform.
People are starting to see that porting games to Linux can be worth the time/cost investment. It's certainly not a sure thing that such a gamble will pay off, but a few "aftermath" blog posts I've read have commented that, while they didn't always make much profit (if any) on the Linux versions themselves, the extra publicity (Linux game! Novelty! News!) raised sales across all platforms.
Porting is a pain in the bum by itself...
Well that depends on how it was developed. Sadly, a lot of games are written using Microsoft-specific technologies (AFAIK a necessity for getting on XBox Wossisname - Arcade? Live? No matter). While not necessarily a showstopper for porting, it can make it more trouble that its worth, especially for inexperienced software developers (ie. new Indie developers) who don't architect their game just so.
Fortunately, Linux is sort of a half-brother to OSX in this sense; porting to one is half-way to porting to the other.
Regarding the point of moving games to the web, I am pretty certain the "real" (heavy 3D) games will always stay native applications, but for the huge casual market the observation is probably true. The "real" games will stay native out of performance and deployment reasons for a long time though I think.
AFAICT, the main reason most high-end games are developed with native clients is generally for access to hardware 3D acceleration. With WebGL (if browsers can ever secure it well enough), that becomes possible in the web browser, too.
I can't argue with your observations about the Humble Bundles themselves, but since the first Humble Bundle, two things have happened:
The Humble Bundles have shown that there is an interest in games on Linux. Desura and Gameolith will show if there is an ongoing market for games on Linux.
Haha, nice pic. I think it's pretty funny, though Fabian did slightly jump the shark in the one in which he had the Yogscast soundboard. The other ones have been used to a good extent though so I'm happy.
Yeah, it was mostly the Yogscast one which got to me. Perhaps because I'm not a listener. The Randy Savage sounds were better, generally due to being "wut?" worthy in their own right.
Have there been others I've missed? I only remember hearing two soundboards, so far...
Hey Raumkraut, where you been hiding?
Around and about. My routines changed, and with them my habit of visiting the forums.
Plus, Fab hadn't done anything that really irritated me in a while.
I had the duped-episodes thing happen to my gpodder as well. I just removed and re-added the feed - which is my usual reaction when gpodder goes a bit sideways.
And am I the only one who loves how Fab says "node"? XD
Open culture vs open source
Source code and cultural works are particularly different because, in most cases, source code is a means to an end - functional software, whereas cultural works are the end in themselves.
The equivalent to open source would be something which accurately describes the method of recreating the work. Not all artistic mediums have anything akin to source code, as far as I can tell. Musical scores or lyric sheets are pretty much the only examples I can think of. Although painting-by-numbers kits might be another.
You can't better humankind with rules
Tape measures, on the other hand...
You're forgetting one thing about ButterFS (sic) and filesystem versioning/rollback: OSX does it.
This means that Canonical is likely to jump straight on to developing the client software.
Read-only Open Source code
Microsoft had a name for that: "Shared Source".
"Yurn" might be the northernmost listener, but that depends on where exactly in Tromsø he lives...
Mortensnes; 69.6837N. Your move, Jørn.
And BTW, the Clarence Clemons and Richard Dreyfuss links are wrong in the shownotes.
They eventually released it just to appease the noise makers, but I haven't seen anyone set up their own "Launchpad". I think that certain people were just using it as a stick to beat Canonical with and had no serious intention of making use of it.
It's a great service, so I don't doubt that people would have used it, had it been in a usable state for anyone but Canonical. Heck, I certainly would have used it - I tried to!
Instead, we went with [url=http://redmine.org/]Redmine[/url:3w4tyoda]
What do you use it for?
We only really used it for bug and feature tracking internally. There were only four of us, so I don't think we taxed it very much.
I looked in to running a Launchpad instance for my company. My advice is: don't bother.
It's open source, sure, but the scripts they use to set up a production instance aren't included in that. Setting up a dev environment is documented (it's mostly "use this tool like this"), but if you want to run a production instance you're on your own.
Instead, we went with Redmine, which was pretty awesome right out of the box.
This was a year or so ago now though, so YMMV.
And there is bug-free code, it just has a few undocumented features.
I'm actually somewhat disappointed that the wall will encompass the Temple Sanguine. I quite like the idea standing on top of the wall, and seeing a distant "forbidden" temple in the hills outside the city walls.
Or maybe have a single small door at the base of the wall, and a sign saying "Do not stray from the path".
Having tall towers along the wall would be nice too. Lit on the outer side, to help guide lost souls back to safety.
And this story today is very inconsistent with the theory: [url]http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/05/04/us-microsoft-novell-idUSTRE74301O20110504[/url:n6pzrebp] :oops:
Nah, that story says nothing about the Attachmate-MS relationship. AFAICT it's just an ongoing legal issue started in Novell's pre-Attachmate days.
You can ramp up the conspiracy siren again when they (inevitably) settle and (inevitably) sign a non-disclosure agreement.
There's even a hint that Miguel de Icaza might soon be a MS employee
Isn't that what he's been gunning for all these years, anyway? :?
Attachmate are, well, both "attached" and "matey" with their Seatlle neighbours.
What report/info are you basing that on? I don't remember seeing anything especially "matey" between Attachmate and MS, other than MS (and friends) offering to give them a huge wad of cash for access to a bunch of patents, which I take to be just business.
I'm all about seeing conspiracies everywhere, but Attachmate just don't strike me as another MS sock/ass-puppet.