Overclock.net › Forums › Software, Programming and Coding › Operating Systems › Linux, Unix › What is holding linux back from PC gaming?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

What is holding linux back from PC gaming? - Page 9

post #81 of 84
Quote:
Originally Posted by enorbet2 View Post

Gaming has been an extremely powerful force shaping computing, and if Valve succeeds at both Source and Steam for Linux, the ripples could swell very large.

I agree completely. Gaming is to computing technology what pornography was to video technology... unfortunately (in that analogy) Windows is the VHS equivalent. wink.gif

Hopefully this time around 'Betamax' will get another shot at redemption!
Quote:
Originally Posted by enorbet2 View Post

Aside (and largely opinion) - Windows 2000 was the most robust GUI OpSys MS ever made, and to the person who touted NT4 I have to say "Really? That OpSys was a clunky, bad joke... literally". It was M$'s ultimate pirate act that shot raspberries at IBM as they took considerable Intellectual Property with very questionable rights to do so. They even claimed a new employee was responsible, not the joint MS/IBM venture that ended so badly, OS/2 Warp 3, who brought the foundations for MS OS/2 NT v3.5 with him from Digital. Why IBM never took MS to court over that employee's non-disclosure agreement with Digital we will probably never know.

I don't want to derail this further with windows history minutiae but other than Kerberos, some slight modifications to NTFS, and the partial abstraction (or further hybridization if you prefer) of the kernel-level device drivers - much of NT4 remained unchanged in NT5 (WIndows2000). I loved Win2K and thought it was great, but regardless of the numerous issues NT4 had and the dubious MS ownership status - I managed a huge enterprise with only 3 FTE's (OK none of us only worked 40hr weeks but still). I still have one of my domain controllers running as a VM simply because it has a current uptime of 16 years without a crash - and would report the entire span if it had not been taken down for hardware replacement and later virtualization.

It was far from perfect and it was horrible to secure... but it worked fantastic for myself and over 2200 users spread over 4 states. If it were possible to buy IBM a beer over it.... I would in a heartbeat. smile.gif
post #82 of 84
Quote:
Originally Posted by DiGiCiDAL View Post

I don't want to derail this further with windows history minutiae but other than Kerberos, some slight modifications to NTFS, and the partial abstraction (or further hybridization if you prefer) of the kernel-level device drivers - much of NT4 remained unchanged in NT5 (WIndows2000).
NT hasn't change that much up until the Min Win project - which users were only starting seeing the benefits of in Win7.
But really, people place too much importance on kernels these days - usually it's the user space that makes or breaks an OS (though I believe the Min Win project is also addressing the core user space APIs as well).
post #83 of 84
Quote:
Originally Posted by Plan9 View Post

NT hasn't change that much up until the Min Win project - which users were only starting seeing the benefits of in Win7.
But really, people place too much importance on kernels these days - usually it's the user space that makes or breaks an OS (though I believe the Min Win project is also addressing the core user space APIs as well).

Agreed... I was simply responding to the logic behind saying "NT4 was crap, 2000 was great" as being seemingly overstated that's all. smile.gif At least in my opinion... naturally YMMV.
post #84 of 84
Quote:
Originally Posted by DiGiCiDAL View Post

Agreed... I was simply responding to the logic behind saying "NT4 was crap, 2000 was great" as being seemingly overstated that's all. smile.gif At least in my opinion... naturally YMMV.
My experiences of NT4 was far from favourable. In fact I hated it. Where as Win2k was -in my opinion at least- the best OS Microsoft have ever released.

I think it's all down to user land. NT4 was an absolute pig to manage, yet 2k was clean and simple. Yeah it had it's faults (telnet being enabled by default, for example), but it was such a breath of fresh air compared to everything that preceded it; both along the NT branch and the woeful DOS frontends)
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Linux, Unix
Overclock.net › Forums › Software, Programming and Coding › Operating Systems › Linux, Unix › What is holding linux back from PC gaming?