To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
I don't understand YOUR point.
There are some games that are only playable with Windows. Ergo, if you want to use those games, you need a Windows pc.
If you don't play, if you play only games with a console version or games with a native linux version or games working without glitches in wine or if you play just abandonware games, then you don't need Windows, but in any other case (and this means a relevant share of the games released in the last 10 years) you need a Windows pc.
Edited 2007-03-07 20:51
I'm currently in the situation of having to dual-boot on my laptop strictly because of Half-life 1. It does work with wine (I have crossover office), but the video is just too choppy for me to tolerate (my 64MB integrated ATI card works with OpenGL, but not as well as under Windows).
However, I just found out that there was a port of Half-life 1 to the PS2. I wonder if that would still work for me (e.g., how does it update itself for network play??).
If it did, I could give up dual-booting. (I also use Parallels for when I have to do VB.NET and C# programming.)
I don't understand YOUR point.
There are some games that are only playable with Windows.
If I read him/her right, the point is that the reverse is not also true. There is no significant piece of open-source software that does not exist in Windows. Firefox, Open Office, Apache, GIMP, Blender, Second Life... but all are available for Windows.
As it stands right now, Linux support and functionality is a subset of Windows support and functionality. And as long as the Linux community continues to use an open-source development model and as long as there exists even one Windows user with a C++ compiler, that is the way it will stay.





Member since:
2006-01-11
And some games can't be played without a console.
What's your point?