>>>>> Well, then, there's really no excuse for not submitting bugs, is
>>>>> there? ;-)
>>>> How do you figure that?
>>> Because you're on the 'net now?
>> And I don't use klogic any more?
> 
> You said you tried it again when you did have an Internet connection.

Let's get this straight: I tried KLogic in 1997 or so. Back then, while 
technically we *did* have an Internet connection, after having just 
spent 3 weeks (!!) getting the graphics card to work, I didn't even 
bother *trying* to get the modem to work. (It's probably a winmodem 
anyway...)

So yeah, not very easy to report bugs. :-P

>> Sure, there are about 25,000 Mahjong clones for Linux. But how many
>> large-scale games are there?
> 
> There are several.  I'm not a gamer, but I'm told by people who are who 
> use Linux that game support is better now than ever.

"Better now than ever" could just mean that there are 2 games now 
instead of only 1. ;-)

As I say, I imagine in future the number will go up rather than down. 
That still doesn't change the fact that at the moment it's rather low.

> Like I said, go to freshmeat.net and have a look.

...so Doom, Quake-2 and Unreal then?

(BTW, I've always wondered what the heck "freshmeat" is. I guess now I 
know... sorta...)

> Go to sourceforge.net and have a look.

Not seeing anything interesting here. (Obviously the wrong serarch term 
or something.)

> Go to Cedega's website and look at what Windows games 
> are supported.

Who?

>> Valve don't release games for Linux.
> 
> http://www.cedega.com/gamesdb/
> 
> Don't just read the "over 40 games certified", look at the list.  Half-
> Life and several (most?) of its derivatives run under Cedega perfectly 
> fine.

Again, this utterly defies belief. Games, more than any other 
application, are legendary for intimately relying on obscure 
undocumented functionallity. Getting even one game to anything 
approaching working would be absurdly difficult. I can't begin to 
imagine how they have managed to do this in less than 20 years...

> There you go again with the "purposely designed" nonsense.  It's not 
> *designed* to be difficult to understand.  Don't confuse complexity with 
> "intentionally meant to be difficult to understand".

It's a Microsoft product. It's purposely designed to be overcomplicated 
and obfuscated.

>> And exactly how many thousand people are working on WINE?
> 
> This may surprise you, but the core development team for most OSS 
> projects is relatively small.  A lot of people can contribute patches, 
> but the core development team reviews and approves as well as doing 
> development.

For something like GNUplot, I can believe it. For something like 
reverse-engineering an entire OS, I'd expect it to take a vast army of 
workers.

>>> I was sure there was something in there.  No matter, look at Mono - it
>>> also addresses the patent issue.  Mono is a reimplementation of the
>>> .NET framework - incidentally, done (I believe) through clean-room
>>> reverse- engineering.
>> Interesting - I was under the impression that it was an ISO "standard"
>> now.
> 
> The language may be, but that doesn't mean the libraries are.

True...

> Semantics, don't start with "it should be impossible" just because you 
> don't have the knowledge or experience.

Oh, so I'm stupid now? That's nice. :-P

Post a reply to this message