Linked by Thom Holwerda on Thu 24th Jul 2014 13:57 UTC
Games

A while ago, we've announced our plans to add Linux support as one of the features of our digital platform, with 100 games on the launch day sometime this fall. We've put much time and effort into this project and now we've found ourselves with over 50 titles, classic and new, prepared for distribution, site infrastructure ready, support team trained and standing by, and absolutely no reason to wait until October or November. We're still aiming to have at least 100 Linux games in the coming months, but we've decided not to delay the launch just for the sake of having a nice-looking number to show off to the press. It's not about them, after all, it's about you. So, one of the most popular site feature requests on our community wishlist is granted today: Linux support has officially arrived on GOG.com!

Good on 'm.

Thread beginning with comment 593210
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[7]: This is great news
by karunko on Fri 25th Jul 2014 12:18 UTC in reply to "RE[6]: This is great news"
karunko
Member since:
2008-10-28

Nothing is 100% attack proof. It happens, but it will also be fixed quickly with the code open and bare for review by anyone.

The code might be available for inspection (definitely a plus) but how many people, except professionals and researchers, actually do that? Take the Heartbleed bug for instance:

- Introduced into OpenSSL's source code repository on December 31, 2011.

- Widespread adoption with OpenSSL version 1.0.1 released on March 14, 2012.

- Reported on April 1, 2014 (and it was no April's Fool).

That's more than two years, so I wouldn't say that free/open necessarily translates to safer. Do I prefer it, given the option? Certainly. Do I assume that everything is rainbows and ponies because of that? No way!


RT.

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[8]: This is great news
by p13. on Fri 25th Jul 2014 12:21 in reply to "RE[7]: This is great news"
p13. Member since:
2005-07-10


The code might be available for inspection (definitely a plus) but how many people, except professionals and researchers, actually do that? Take the Heartbleed bug for instance:

- Introduced into OpenSSL's source code repository on December 31, 2011.

- Widespread adoption with OpenSSL version 1.0.1 released on March 14, 2012.

- Reported on April 1, 2014 (and it was no April's Fool).

That's more than two years, so I wouldn't say that free/open necessarily translates to safer. Do I prefer it, given the option? Certainly. Do I assume that everything is rainbows and ponies because of that? No way!


RT.


Can't fix anything you don't know of.
The very fact that these stats are available for you to evaluate is a direct consequence of the source being open.
There is nothing to hide.

It was fixed a few days after it's discovery.
A workaround was available less than an hour after discovery, namely to disable SSL heartbeat.
This completely eliminates the attack, at the cost of some performance.

Microsoft has never been as fast fixing anything, ever.

Edited 2014-07-25 12:23 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 2