Linked by Thom Holwerda on Wed 12th May 2010 15:07 UTC
Games "Valve Corporation has today rolled out their Steam Mac OS X client to the general public and confirmed something we have been reporting for two years: the Steam content delivery platform and Source Engine are coming to Linux. This news is coming days after we discovered proof in Steam's Mac OS X Client of Linux support and subsequently found more Linux references and even the unreleased Steam Linux client. The day has finally come and Linux gamers around the world have a reason to rejoice, as this is the biggest news for the Linux gaming community that sees very few tier-one titles." This means Linux users can finally enjoy two of the best games in recent years: Left 4 Dead and Left 4 Dead 2. BOOMER!
Thread beginning with comment 424103
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
nt_jerkface
Member since:
2009-08-26

How dare we question the design philosophy of Linus and Greg K-H when Linux is such a resounding success on the desktop. Telling hardware companies to open source their drivers or f off has worked wonders.

Having a consumer desktop Unix with a stable abi is non-sense just as Greg famously claimed. Oh except for OSX which has over 10x the share of Linux in the US. But other than that, non-sense.

Edited 2010-05-13 01:08 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 0

smitty Member since:
2005-10-13

How dare we question the design philosophy of Linus and Greg K-H when Linux is such a resounding success on the desktop. Telling hardware companies to open source their drivers or f off has worked wonders.

Having a consumer desktop Unix with a stable abi is non-sense just as Greg famously claimed. Oh except for OSX which has over 10x the share of Linux in the US. But other than that, non-sense.


Are you seriously claiming that Apple's success is due to having a stable hardware API?

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

AHAHAHAHAHAHA!

Heck, Apple doesn't even allow a lot of hardware to run on the OS at all - hence the hackintosh community that has sprung up. OSX is popular because of the user interface and the massive advertisement campaign they run, not because lots of hardware runs on it or because they are friendly to developers. (Ask any iPhone developer what they think about that)

Edit: Oh, and questioning is fine, but you don't seem to be doing much of that. What you're doing is declaring that you're right and they're wrong, without even putting out any argument other than "it's hard for companies with proprietary drivers so it must be bad". I assume you realize that everyone agrees that it's hard, and that some of us just think that there are other benefits to the non-stable API that outweigh the harm it causes.

Edited 2010-05-13 06:36 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 5

nt_jerkface Member since:
2009-08-26


Are you seriously claiming that Apple's success is due to having a stable hardware API?

Where did I claim that?

I pointed out that there is a successful Unix desktop that has a stable ABI. I said nothing about the reasons behind its success, just that one exists.

Reply Parent Score: 3

No it isnt Member since:
2005-11-14

OS X hasn't even close to 1/10 of the hardware support Linux has, so your example isn't only irrelevant, it's exceptionally poorly chosen. You obviously just thought it would be a great idea to state OS X as a shining example of how to do things right, and entirely forgot what your example was supposed to be about: hardware support, not market share. Linux has better support for Apple hardware than OS X has.

Reply Parent Score: 3

nt_jerkface Member since:
2009-08-26

OSX is an example of how Unix should be on the desktop. A hardware company can compile a binary driver and expect it to work with OSX for years. The audio and video stacks are clean, the software distribution system is source agnostic and there's no holy war against proprietary drivers by the developers.

Reply Parent Score: 3