billg cleans up Doom ..

On Tue, 31 Jul 2007 10:20:10 +0200, Hadron wrote:

> cc <scatnubbs RemoveThis @hotmail.com> writes:
>
>> On Jul 30, 6:45 pm, Tim Smith <reply_in_gr... RemoveThis @mouse-potato.com> wrote:
>>> On 2007-07-30, Linonut <lino... RemoveThis @bellsouth.net> wrote:
>>>
>>> >> Which makes me wonder why so few game studios target Linux.
>>>
>>> > You know the answer. It's a numbers game; Windows has the numbers
>>> > right now.
>>>
>>> But many game studios release Mac versions, and it is widely claimed
>>> here that Linux is bigger on the desktop than Mac.
>>
>> Maybe Mac is bigger on the desktop than Linux? Maybe Mac commercials
>> just make it seem bigger than it is, roping in game makers? Maybe open
>> sourcing code just isn't that enticing for companies who put in alot of
>> man hours developing games?
>>
>>
> All of those and one more.
>
> Windows and Mac users *buy* SW.

Linux users pay for software, too.

>
> See http://lokigames.com/ for more details.
>
> (ps you don't have to open source your games)

You don't have to open source Linux versions of games, either.



--
Rick

On Tue, 31 Jul 2007 11:54:39 +0200, Hadron wrote:

> cc <scatnubbs.RemoveThis@hotmail.com> writes:
>
>> On Jul 31, 4:20 am, Hadron <hadronqu....RemoveThis@googlemail.com> wrote:
>>> cc <scatnu....RemoveThis@hotmail.com> writes:
>>> > On Jul 30, 6:45 pm, Tim Smith <reply_in_gr....RemoveThis@mouse-potato.com>
>>> > wrote:
>>> >> On 2007-07-30, Linonut <lino....RemoveThis@bellsouth.net> wrote:
>>>
>>> >> >> Which makes me wonder why so few game studios target Linux.
>>>
>>> >> > You know the answer. It's a numbers game; Windows has the
>>> >> > numbers right now.
>>>
>>> >> But many game studios release Mac versions, and it is widely
>>> >> claimed here that Linux is bigger on the desktop than Mac.
>>>
>>> > Maybe Mac is bigger on the desktop than Linux? Maybe Mac commercials
>>> > just make it seem bigger than it is, roping in game makers? Maybe
>>> > open sourcing code just isn't that enticing for companies who put in
>>> > alot of man hours developing games?
>>>
>>> All of those and one more.
>>>
>>> Windows and Mac users *buy* SW.
>>>
>>> Seehttp://lokigames.com/for more details.
>>>
>>> (ps you don't have to open source your games)
>>
>> Games could be developed easy without touching a single piece of GPL
>> code?
>>
>>
> Ask ID or Epic neither of whom released their Quake/Unreal code with the
> game releases. I wonder why?

Why don't you ask them? Let us know.

--
Rick

Linonut <linonut.TakeThisOut@bellsouth.net> writes:

> After takin' a swig o' grog, cc belched out this bit o' wisdom:
>
>> On Jul 31, 4:20 am, Hadron <hadronqu....TakeThisOut@googlemail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> Windows and Mac users *buy* SW.
>
> Of course. They practically have to, if they don't know about OSS.
>
> I saw an acquaintance in an office store, buying a graphics application.
> I mentioned that there were some good free alternatives, but it was like
> my words went right through his head. He was intent on buying the
> package, costly though it was.
>
>>> Seehttp://lokigames.com/for more details.
>>>
>>> (ps you don't have to open source your games)
>>
>> Games could be developed easy without touching a single piece of GPL
>> code?
>
> Yes. Hadron's full of it, as happens all too often with his posts.

Did you even read my post you muppet? I was saying that games companies
CAN AND DO release games for Linux without opening the source.

Try reading before you put your big foot in it.

On Jul 31, 5:54 am, Hadron <hadronqu... DeleteThis @googlemail.com> wrote:
> cc <scatnu... DeleteThis @hotmail.com> writes:
> > On Jul 31, 4:20 am, Hadron <hadronqu... DeleteThis @googlemail.com> wrote:
> >> cc <scatnu... DeleteThis @hotmail.com> writes:
> >> > On Jul 30, 6:45 pm, Tim Smith <reply_in_gr... DeleteThis @mouse-potato.com> wrote:
> >> >> On 2007-07-30, Linonut <lino... DeleteThis @bellsouth.net> wrote:
>
> >> >> >> Which makes me wonder why so few game studios target Linux.
>
> >> >> > You know the answer. It's a numbers game; Windows has the numbers right
> >> >> > now.
>
> >> >> But many game studios release Mac versions, and it is widely claimed
> >> >> here that Linux is bigger on the desktop than Mac.
>
> >> > Maybe Mac is bigger on the desktop than Linux? Maybe Mac commercials
> >> > just make it seem bigger than it is, roping in game makers? Maybe open
> >> > sourcing code just isn't that enticing for companies who put in alot
> >> > of man hours developing games?
>
> >> All of those and one more.
>
> >> Windows and Mac users *buy* SW.
>
> >> Seehttp://lokigames.com/formore details.
>
> >> (ps you don't have to open source your games)
>
> > Games could be developed easy without touching a single piece of GPL
> > code?
>
> Ask ID or Epic neither of whom released their Quake/Unreal code with the
> game releases. I wonder why?


I guess I assumed that it would be alot of duplicate/unnecessary work
unless you used some GPL code. Guess not. I've never done any game
development, or any graphic development under Linux at all (without
java), so thanks for the tip.

Roy Schestowitz wrote:
> ____/ John Locke on Monday 30 July 2007 16:33 : \____
>
>> On Mon, 30 Jul 2007 15:17:34 +0100, Doug Mentohl <doug_mentohl RemoveThis @linuxmail.org>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> "As the lights fell, a video screen lowered above the stage; It was time
>>> for the main event. The crowd cheered as the Doom's familiar corridors
>>> began to roll. But it was not the Doom soldier chasing the demons, it
>>> was... Bill Gates! Microsoft's fearless leader was superimposed running
>>> inside the game in a long black trench coat and brandishing a shotgun
>>>
>>> http://www.reelsplatter.com/doommedia.html
>> That's pretty damn funny...wasn't Bill Gates an anti-gun advocate ?
>>
>> I know one thing. This was back in the day when Microsoft was
>> focused on customer needs. In this case, the gamers.
>
> Microsoft has become the gamer in recent years. It games the ISO, it games the
> customer's needs, it games the EU...
>
> Microsoft -- we got game!
>

Well Roy, you can't blame them for being creative when it comes to legal
and marketing issues. M$ has big game there. Now Windows Vista, it is
in the penalty box. I've heard and seen nothing but nightmares from
that product, and several ISP's here in Texas are refusing to support it
until service pack one comes out.

Brett

On 2007-07-31, Linonut <linonut.DeleteThis@bellsouth.net> wrote:

> Of course. They practically have to, if they don't know about OSS.
>
> I saw an acquaintance in an office store, buying a graphics application.
> I mentioned that there were some good free alternatives, but it was like
> my words went right through his head. He was intent on buying the
> package, costly though it was.

It's the convenience factor hard at work. You have to look at it from
the perspective of a person who needs a program to perform a
specific task and doesn't wish to be bothered with software
that is not shrink wrapped because his perception
is that it can't be good if it is free. Programs like
Partition Magic,Ghost and some multimedia programs
are big candidates for this type of consumer.
There are free alternatives for the above
programs all over the place, but they lack the one item
the consumer needs and that is *comfort and security*.
It's a mindset that needs to be educated.

Hadron said this:
>>> (ps you don't have to open source your games)

Someone else said this:
>> Games could be developed easy without touching a single piece of GPL
>> code?

Linonut said this:
> Yes.

So you agree with Hadron...

> Hadron's full of it, as happens all too often with his posts.

and then say he's full of it?

It was on, or about, Tue, 31 Jul 2007 12:35:02 +0000, that as I was
halfway through a large jam doughnut, Rick wrote:

> On Tue, 31 Jul 2007 10:20:10 +0200, Hadron wrote:
>
>> cc <scatnubbs.RemoveThis@hotmail.com> writes:
>>
>>> On Jul 30, 6:45 pm, Tim Smith <reply_in_gr....RemoveThis@mouse-potato.com> wrote:
>>>> On 2007-07-30, Linonut <lino....RemoveThis@bellsouth.net> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> >> Which makes me wonder why so few game studios target Linux.
>>>>
>>>> > You know the answer. It's a numbers game; Windows has the numbers
>>>> > right now.
>>>>
>>>> But many game studios release Mac versions, and it is widely claimed
>>>> here that Linux is bigger on the desktop than Mac.
>>>
>>> Maybe Mac is bigger on the desktop than Linux? Maybe Mac commercials
>>> just make it seem bigger than it is, roping in game makers? Maybe open
>>> sourcing code just isn't that enticing for companies who put in alot
>>> of man hours developing games?
>>>
>>>
>> All of those and one more.
>>
>> Windows and Mac users *buy* SW.
>
> Linux users pay for software, too.
>
>
>> See http://lokigames.com/ for more details.
>>
>> (ps you don't have to open source your games)
>
> You don't have to open source Linux versions of games, either.

Seems like Quack *still* needs a clue..

--
The universe exploded out of nothingness 14 billion years ago.
14 billion years later, & some of us have 100 trillion
interconnected cells, & a self-aware consciousness.
Others post through GoogleGroups, & insist on installing Vista.

On Jul 31, 9:50 pm, "[H]omer" <s... DeleteThis @uce.gov> wrote:
> Halfwit Hardon wrote:
> >> Windows and Mac users *buy* SW.
>
> Really?
>
> From what I've seen, mostly they just *steal* it.
>


Then how are software companies making so much money?

Tim Smith <reply_in_group.DeleteThis@mouse-potato.com> writes:

> Hadron said this:
>>>> (ps you don't have to open source your games)
>
> Someone else said this:
>>> Games could be developed easy without touching a single piece of GPL
>>> code?
>
> Linonut said this:
>> Yes.
>
> So you agree with Hadron...
>
>> Hadron's full of it, as happens all too often with his posts.
>
> and then say he's full of it?

For quite while now, the "new" Linonut has been bawling out rubbish
without paying much attention to the actual subject or what the points
being made are. He is about as balanced as drunken sailor.

After takin' a swig o' grog, waterskidoo belched out this bit o' wisdom:

> On 2007-07-31, Linonut <linonut.RemoveThis@bellsouth.net> wrote:
>
>> Of course. They practically have to, if they don't know about OSS.
>>
>> I saw an acquaintance in an office store, buying a graphics application.
>> I mentioned that there were some good free alternatives, but it was like
>> my words went right through his head. He was intent on buying the
>> package, costly though it was.
>
> It's the convenience factor hard at work. You have to look at it from
> the perspective of a person who needs a program to perform a
> specific task and doesn't wish to be bothered with software
> that is not shrink wrapped because his perception
> is that it can't be good if it is free. Programs like
> Partition Magic,Ghost and some multimedia programs
> are big candidates for this type of consumer.
> There are free alternatives for the above
> programs all over the place, but they lack the one item
> the consumer needs and that is *comfort and security*.
> It's a mindset that needs to be educated.

I can agree somewhat.

But it was even weirder than that. It was like it didn't even register
with him that I was talking about free apps. He barely nodded to
acknowledge my speaking, but went ahead as if I'd said nothing -- no
questions asked, even.

--
Tux rox!

On Jul 31, 10:38 pm, Rick <n....RemoveThis@nomail.com> wrote:
> On Tue, 31 Jul 2007 19:31:15 -0700, cc wrote:
> > On Jul 31, 9:50 pm, "[H]omer" <s....RemoveThis@uce.gov> wrote:
> >> Halfwit Hardon wrote:
> >> >> Windows and Mac users *buy* SW.
>
> >> Really?
>
> >> From what I've seen, mostly they just *steal* it.
>
> > Then how are software companies making so much money?
>
> Well, there are still sales ...
>

So mostly they steal it, except of course when they're spending so
much money on it? 35% of software is pirated according to some
estimates, so mostly people buy it. Even people using pirated software
mostly pay for it, but pay less, with $1 going to pirated software for
every $2 spent legitimately. There are some disputes to these figures,
some saying they're exaggerated tenfold. Either way windows and mac
users are mostly buying legitimate software, and almost all are paying
for either pirated or legit copies. So even if you want to claim
paying for pirated software is "stealing" still (even though the OP
said the users *buy* software, didn't say it was legit software, but I
digress), the statement is still incorrect.

cc wrote:
> On Jul 31, 9:50 pm, "[H]omer" <s....TakeThisOut@uce.gov> wrote:
>> Halfwit Hardon wrote:
>>>> Windows and Mac users *buy* SW.
>>
>> Really?
>>
>> From what I've seen, mostly they just *steal* it.
>>
>
>
> Then how are software companies making so much money?

Microsoft does it through fraudulent accounting, of course. Just ask any
cola idiot - they'll tell you.