Games as an alternative Linux desktop strategy
Bless Steven J. Vaughan-Nichols for his optimism. Writing for Computerworld, Vaughan-Nichols suggests that we don't need to wait for the Year of the Linux Desktop, because we've already had it. Somehow, I missed that. Vaughan-Nichols points to HP shipping Linux, Dell shipping Linux, etc., but come on: a trickle of retail activity does not a "Year of the Linux Desktop" make.
Actually, as I've written several times before, we don't need a "Year of the Linux Desktop," largely because the applications that run on my Mac (and on your Windows PC) already are Linux. Google, Amazon, and a huge swath of the Web are written on to run remotely on Linux, then delivered to your Mac/Windows/Linux PC. This fetish with Linux desktops is outdated.
However, if you must persist in that fetish, I'd recommend Andrew Min's approach: gaming. As Apple demonstrated on the desktop, the way to beat Microsoft is not at its own game, but by changing the nature and, hence, the rules of the game. Min suggests that Linux gaming may be the key to beating Windows-plus-Office, in part because the demographics of gamers mesh well with the demographics of Linux users
Gamers are adventurous folks. That right there is a positive sign. Linux adopters often need to be adventurous in order to even install a new operating system. But even better, gamers often build their own computers, either from scratch, a barebones kit, or a stripped down retail box. And as I pointed out above, what is often in the top 3 most expensive items on many gaming computers is the Windows Vista retail CD, ranging from the $214 Home Premium to the $249 Ultimate Edition. Gamers, therefore, are a ripe target for the open source community.
He has a point. Perhaps the place to start, however, is with a Linux-based gaming system, one that also allows its games to be run on Linux desktops? This would let gamers start out on a dedicated gaming device, then migrate their gaming into their work machine.
I still think it's a Quixotic endeavor, this Linux desktop. But to the extent that people want it, a gaming strategy makes as much sense as any, if not more sense.
Matt Asay brings a decade of in-the-trenches open-source business and legal experience to The Open Road, with an emphasis on emerging open-source business strategies and opportunities. Matt is vice president of business development at Alfresco, a company that develops open-source software for content management. He is a member of the CNET Blog Network and is not an employee of CNET. Disclosure.
If I'm doing anything like that I do it in Code::Blocks with MinGW because it doesn't cripple OpenGL (despite the bugginess).
There is only a question, who will start fist, and pull others to program in Open parallel to DirectX.
http://www.lgdb.org/
Hardcore gamers are bleeding-edge hardware junkies (even if most are not nearly as knowledgeable as they think they are) but support for the latest hardware is always lagging, not least because it takes months for new code to filter down from kernel.org to the various distros.
Case in point, installing Linux on a computer with an ICH9 based chipset: some distros won't recognise the (reorderable) HDD order properly, some won't recognise the L1 ethernet chip, some will recognise the HDD ordering but GRUB will still fail and some will require that DVMT is disabled or they'll crash the moment the screensaver kicks in.
It may be solid as a rock once it's actually running but that's just too much hassle for a lot of people.
However, I don't see anyone throwing all that DirectX code away when the gamer can just dual boot. It isn't likely to happen. It's easier to just code it for DirectX and be done with it.
http://live.linux-gamers.net/
The thing that mostly concerned me is to make it work they'd most likely choose to make licensing deals to distribute the closed source hardware drivers such as the video drivers along with the game disk so a. The user doesn't have to know how to install them separately and b. the game programmer would no longer have to worry about what version of video drivers are on the user's machine. Each game would always use it's own respective close source drivers. Whichever ones they choose to develop the game with.
So, that was really my train of though. Even if they used that distro they would still probably custom it via getting a license to distribute whatever close source drivers they choose to use for their game.
The problem is that Linux isn't an operating system, it doesn't help us pretending that it is. Some fuzzy concept is not enough of a development platform for anyone.
I agree, we don't need a "Year of the Linux Desktop", because it's happening gradually anyway and that's probably the best way. I think eventually most people will be running Linux and it will happen at home first, because many enterprise environments are in a deadly embrace with Windows and users have no choice about what to run. The Mac acts as a very nice terminal but as it moves toward more lock-down and lock-in, some of us prefer freedom and will both put up with the extra growing pains and will contribute rather than move in a direction that seems oppose open source.
After reading the article, I am still unsure why it would be a wise thing for Linux to pursue a strategy to compete against Windows based on its weakest point?
Most of the problems are business related: MS gives some breaks on software/support deals to keep game developer companies (1) happy and (2) bound to Windows/Xbox platform.
If there were no restrains, believe me, Linux infrastructure would have been relatively quickly pushed to the level needed to develop games/etc. Technology is not a problem - politics are.
I'd like to see Steam on Linux in 2010: http://www.worthlessgenius.com/2008/12/02/valve-needs-to-make-games-for-linux/
Could you imagine if some rich millionare/company were to donate money just to create ONE hit video game only specific to Ubuntu?.
A re-post:
Written by spitzbubchen the 26 Oct 08 at 16:10. Category: Marketing. Related to: Nothing/Others. New
The intrinsic flexibility of Linux makes it an optimal system that could be customized and developed to offer a more superior gaming platform than compared to Microsoft based products. Ubuntu should consider partnering or collaborating with big name computer video game developers to bring some unique video games only to the Ubuntu platform that can specifically take advantage of Linux?s resources in compared to Microsoft OS?s.
There are several reasons for going into video games:
1) the video gaming population out there is huge and getting huger. If Ubuntu could become the de facto standard gaming platform out there it would drastically increase it?s market share. The market share for desktop Linux has always hovered around 1%, mainly because Linux has never had anything unique to offer with respect to Windows. There has been no real incentive to switch.
2) video games demand serious hardware as the newest graphics cards, sound cards, monitors, interface devices, etc? Having Ubuntu used as a gaming platform would force hardware manufactures to put time and effort in making Linux drivers.
3) video games have a high turnover rate. Once a video game is done, the user will want the next one. The next one out there is a unique product and has no established competing products. This is not the case for standard software applications as office suites or graphical packages. Why bother moving to Openoffice and Inkscape when there exists de facto standard products as Microsoft Office and Adobe Illustrator? The high turnover rate of video games allows an entry point for Ubuntu to gain more market share.
Please don't bring up Wine and Cedega, while they do a mighty job to get things working, still the vast majority of games will not run, or not run as they should, there is no disputing it, it's not an opinion, it's a fact.
Performance is another issue, Windows, as can be expected, and contrary to what some of the Linux zealots may have you believe, performs much better than Linux when running games, I have yet to ever see one single game, even if said game has both a native Linux and Windows version, I have yet to see one game that will run faster on Linux than it does on Windows. In my experience they run noticeably faster on Windows than Linux. I'm what might be called a 'hard core' gamer, I haven't played every game in existence by any means, but I have played a lot, and like I said, out of the games I play, and out of the ones that will actually run on Linux, performance wise it's Windows 100% - Linux zip.
Then we can go to the other side of gaming, and that is modding/mapping for games, you know, creating levels, modifications etc. If your using Linux, and can actually run game 'X' that you are interested in modding/mapping for, the chances of you actually being able to use the tools on Linux, are practically non existent. (yeah, you may be able to find some obscure games where this may not be the case, but we are not really talking about that are we, we are talking about taking to Windows on the gaming front) Most modding tools are Win32 only. Even with games like Doom3/Quake4, which will run natively under Linux, you still can't use the editor and other related modding tools. Win32 only. Yes, you can use GTK Radiant to build your maps/Levels, but your still without the other 'sub' editors, light editor etc,etc, and even though it is technically possible for you to build a Quake4 map, your still so out of luck, because there is no way for you to compile it, and therefore play it, so it is useless to you. This is coming from games that have native Linux clients, and it still can't be done, what can you expect from games that aren't native?. And don't kid yourselves, mapping/modding is a big part of gaming today, and from the Linux point of view, you are just out of luck.
I doubt very much whether Linux will ever be able to go toe to toe with Windows on the gaming front, I just don't see it happening. It's not the fault of Linux I hear you say, it's the developers, they don't make Linux versions etc, no, it's not Linux fault, but, it IS Linux problem.
Don't get me wrong, I like Linux, it's much fun, I have been using it for 4 or 5 years, no, it is not my main OS, that is Windows XP, the reason being, I can do EVERYTHING I want to in Windows, the unfortunate truth is, I can't say the same for Linux, so it just can't be my main OS, and unfortunately, for me, I don't see Linux ever being able to be a drop in replacement for Windows, because I can't ever see it being able to do EVERYTHING I want my computer to do, where as Windows can.
Sure, if all you do is a surf the net, Email, a bit of office work, Linux may be able to replace Windows, but if you widen your scope, Gaming, Graphics and Music for me, you will quickly find that Linux starts to hit it's limits, where it just can't compete with Windows, or perhaps the software that Windows has to offer in the various fields.
Blender ain't no 3dsmax
The Gimp ain't no Photoshop (CS4)
etc, etc . . .
Then we can go on to hardware, how about that Latest Video or Sound card, or Mother board, Windows, they will all work as soon as you can buy them, you'll have finished that latest high end game in all it's graphical glory, at max settings on your latest hardware, long before you can even get that same hardware running correctly in Linux, (yeah, I know, not Linux fault, but remember, it IS Linux problem) oh, I forgot, it doesn't really matter, because you can't play that latest high end game under Linux anyway ;)
oh, and try getting your $40K ProTools set up running in Linux and on and on and on we go . . .
Anyway, for all the money I'd have to pay for Photoshop I'd expect it to be better. If it wasn't I'd have to kill a fool. However, I also suspect that if that everybody that pirated their software had to actually buy their own programs, then things like GIMP and Open Office would be much more popular.
I've made an effort for everything on my machine to either be open source or paid for. Try it, it isn't always easy. Even though I know DRM will never work, sometimes I wish they would invent a prefect method of DRM that couldn't be cracked. Then we'd see how popular Windows really was. Now I'm not saying you're a pirate, but if any of your software is pirated then your argument doesn't really hold because yeah I'm sure your world is a lot better when you're using software for free that you were supposed to pay for. I'm not saying that's the case though, but that's usually how this argument goes.
Maybe you're not doing that, but that's what a lot of people do. They just steal a whole bunch of software like Windows and Office and Photoshop and say look how much better Windows is! Yeah, if they tried actually paying for everything they're suppose to pay for they'd be singing a different tune though.
What he's suggesting is that making games a focus for Linux, and actually making it the strongest platform for gaming, would be a good strategy in trying to pry users loose from Windows. And you know what, he's right. If it's possible... well I have no doubt it's possible, what I'm not sure is if is likely unless there was some major shift that I don't see right now.
Games and MS office are the two real linchpins for Microsoft (beside simple inertia from the monopoly of course). The truth is you can already live without office, but to win that battle you need to get businesses to switch, and that's a difficult equation because of retraining, support expertise, etc.
Gaming is the other pillar, the one thing that Linux can't replace, at best it manages to mimic some of it after the fact.... not nearly good enough. But the fact of the matter is, if the money and effort were spent to make developing games on Linux easier, more effective (profitable is the other problem, and that comes back to the monopoly numbers) it would be a heck of a lot easier to pry gamers away from windows. Many of them hate microsoft, but continue to send them money by the bucketful because there is no viable alternative. Create one and they'll abandon MS very quickly.
Dumbest argument ever.
I suppose Shake could never have run well on Windows either.
Doom 3 ran at a higher res for me when I tried it in Linux. Not my kindof game at all but that's not the point. Probably helped that it was OpenGL based.
Sorry, no, I'm not angry, and I'm talking about what Linux gaming could be, I don't believe Linux gaming will ever even remotely be able to stand toe to toe with Windows, let alone beat it. How can it, the majority of developers don't support it. Wine and Cedega are, well, I'll just say they do a job, but they are far from ideal, and bring with them negatives, the least of which is adding that extra layer to the gaming experience, and thus adding to the performance issue Linux has due to various reasons, not the least of which are cutting edge hardware/driver support. Hey, I could be wrong, and Linux could be the next great Gaming platform, utterly stomping on Windows, but I highly doubt it, it wouldn't upset me, or be the least bit of a problem to me if it did, but I'd be willing to bet it's not going to happen. Lack of developer support = No Chance - again, it's not Linux fault, but it IS Linux problem.
I own all my software, no Pirated stuff here, I even own Winzip, as apposed to using the trial/shareware version, continually ignoring the nag screens as a lot of people do, I purchased it and WinRAR as well.
"I think you are missing the point, the suggestion isn't that Linux is as good for games as Windows currently, that would be absurd and your reply would be appropriate if that was what he is saying."
No, I'm not missing the point at all.
"What he's suggesting is that making games a focus for Linux, and actually making it the strongest platform for gaming, would be a good strategy in trying to pry users loose from Windows. And you know what, he's right. If it's possible... well I have no doubt it's possible, what I'm not sure is if is likely unless there was some major shift that I don't see right now."
It's not going to happen, Linux can't do it, simply because it's not in their hands, it's up to the developers, unless they start to support Linux, it's already over. Gamers don't want to, and wont, jump through the hoops you have to in Linux, using things like Wine/Cedega etc, when it's so simple, you get 100% functionality, and the performance is better on Windows, it's a no brainer. But yes, if it did ever happen, I believe the exodus of people from Windows would make Microsoft's head spin, and there would be servers caving under the strain, as all these people were downloading Linux distro's, Linux would be an 'overnight sensation' as it were.
"So, what you're saying is that because the games and mod tools aren't currently on Linux that's because they never could be...."
No, that's not what I'm saying at all, of course it could be, but again, the ball isn't really in Linux court, it's up to the developers, and most of them are simply not interested, they couldn't care less. So your left with what we have today, Wine/Cedega etc, and games with limited functionality, and zero modding support. Not putting down Wine/Cedega, they are making an admirable effort, but . . .
"Dumbest argument ever."
Thanks, and seeing how the 'argument' is a creation entirely of your own mind, I could shoot a witty insult right back at you, I will refrain however.
"PS
Doom 3 ran at a higher res for me when I tried it in Linux. Not my kindof game at all but that's not the point. Probably helped that it was OpenGL based."
All though one could argue the relationship of res to FPS/Performance, I'm really talking about FPS(Frames Per Second) which yes, is influenced by resolution, but anyway . . .
I myself am a huge id Software fan/supporter, I own every game they have made, at least 4 copies of each (can't go installing on multiple PC's and using them simultaneously in a LAN situation and only own 1 copy now can you ;) ) and in my experience, even though they all, including Doom3, have native Linux support, be it out of the box, developer supplied shortly after release, or supplied via a third party, they all run faster and smoother under Windows, and of course you can mod them all to your hearts content, this includes Doom3. Like I said, this is in my personal experience, the only thing I can really go by and trust, and in Doom3's case, it ran approx 10-20 FPS slower on Linux, depending on which version/Point release was used.
Continued below, reached the 4999 character limit, sorry
Lower framerate? I haven't seen it and that was using Wine. But once again if the Linux community and game developers felt they wanted to work on the gaming aspect they'd simply dig into the bottle neck and fix it. Its not a long shot as Linux runs just about everything else faster than Windows especially in the server realm.
As for your choice of OS...thats nice. I can't do everything on Windows that I can do on Linux. Thats why I bring my laptop in to work so I don't have to bother with my Windows PC. I don't have a Windows PC anywhere in my house. I am able to do EVERYTHING from my Linux boxes.
My apologies if I have upset anyone, that was not my intention, I just came across a link to this discussion, and well the rest is history. Sorry to bother you, I'll be off now and leave you all to it.
All the Best.
Gamers are also "in the know". They are often times the family computer repair guy and recommend software. If you can switch the gamers you can switch the world.
Repeat after me: Code is not an Asset, it's a Liability. Open Sourcing shares that Liability with your users and still leaves you with the brand authority.
Console gaming has had a rebirth and until you get a partner w/ hardware to accept a Linux OS client for gaming you will not gain any significant market share past a subset of normal Linux users. Developers need an incentive to create on a platform and that is the reason that the Microsoft X-Box was able to gain market share so quickly. It provided easy access to Windows and the X-Box console markets w/ minimal effort. Now Microsoft has been trying to flip the market toward X-Box and away from Windows.
If you are going to get the Linux gaming community off the ground, then you're going to have to have funding. Funding can come in small amounts and community efforts, but to gain the large $'s, a console must be manufactured to guarantee some level of revenue for the console manufacturer.
The issue is that if you are going to go to all of the trouble to "create a console", then why build it on Linux? The licensing schema does not benefit the console manufacturer. And given the engineering effort and manufacturing #'s you'd have to hit to get costs down, it is a HUGE risk not controlling the OS platform or being able to block others from doing it.
Also, there are few technological barriers. As an example, an X-Box 360 could easily be adapted to run this same platform. So what incentive is there for a console manufacturer to go out of their way to use Linux for this? Not even short-term market protection to recoup the investment.
Therefore, the only real viable Linux entry point within consoles would be: Handhelds.
Not exactly bold or easy/interesting/desired ports to desktops, but it at least could start incenting developers to learn to utilize tools associated with Linux for programming/deployment top to bottom.
I'm sure there's an idle manufacturing facility in China right now just itching to start churning out anything for a buck.
Two things I like about that comment.
Firstly, it suggests that a single great networked game can do the trick. I think that's possible, although two or three would be better.
Secondly, picking the right genre. MMORPGs are great on the PC. The second greatest genre for the PC is also well done by Blizzard: the Real-time strategy game (Starcraft, Warcraft III) with online competition.
The strength of Linux in these genres could be the openness of Linux. Make it a priority to make the game easily hackable/programmable. No, it's not enough to make it easy. Make the programmability addictive. In fact, make it a goal to draw people down the slippery slope from customizing their character, to customizing the game, to fixing the game, to developing the game, to optimizing the game.
-
by storm14k
January 6, 2009 12:02 PM PST
- I agree and disagree at the same time. I don't believe we need a "year of the Linux desktop" nor do I believe its some fetish to be ignored. While web apps (I'm assuming you are assuming the death of desktop apps) run anywhere viruses and spyware run on Windows. Now the zealots can jump up and down all they want but the structure of a *nix system is much more capable of dealing with malware without bolting on costly resource draining prevention measures than Windows is....so save the market share crap. In addition Windows costs, Linux doesn't. So I do believe the OS choice in the end will matter even more as it becomes rather silly to spend money on the OS AND protection only to use apps that run anywhere.
-
Reply to this comment
-
(41 Comments)I'd agree that the "year of Linux" has come and gone. For Linux people its not about some major market share or bragging rights. MS has to worry about that for revenue purposes and MS zealots just worry about it because they hate everything else. The "year of Linux" came when people started blogging about it, companies started detecting Linux on their websites and automatically offered Linux downloads, music stores like Amazon built a Linux client, hardware vendors started offering drivers etc... get the point? The "year" came when Linux users no longer had to hunt for compatible services and could mainly use the same services Mac and Windows users were able to no matter how big or small the market share. Its still not perfect but it gets better everyday.