On Wed, 17 Dec 2008 16:59:50 +0000, Invisible wrote:

>>>>>> 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

Presumably you had more than one machine with a modem?

>>> 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. ;-)

Except that that is not the state of things.  Don't buy into the FUD.

> 
> 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?

You didn't go look, did you?

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

It's a catalog of open-source (and other) software.  It's an excellent 
resource.

>> Go to sourceforge.net and have a look.
> 
> Not seeing anything interesting here. (Obviously the wrong serarch term
> or something.)

"games".  3151 hits.

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

Shall I give you another URL to "letmegooglethatforyou.com"?  Are we 
learning yet? ;-)

>>> 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...

Obviously it's not absurdly difficult.  Stop arguing with reality.

>> 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.

No, it's not.  God, here I am, Mr. Linux Zealot, and I'm telling you that 
Microsoft products are NOT purposely designed to be overcomplicated and 
obfuscated.

How many of Microsoft's engineering team have you met?  Personally?  And 
talked with?

>>> 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.

Or a few very smart people who have a background in operating system 
design and programming languages.

You also expect coredump analysis to be impossible, but it's not.  Again, 
stop arguing with reality, you're guaranteed to lose.

>>>> 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

Don't put words in my mouth, Andy.  There's a difference between "lacking 
knowledge and/or experience" and "stupid".

Jim

Post a reply to this message