[Gilrond]

gregski said:

And noone seems to care about the monopoly (pretty much) Valve has for digital games distribution.

gregski: I personally don't use Valve's Steam, precisely because I care and don't approve DRM in general. And I hope any games that Valve brings to Steam for Linux will be available outside Steam as well. In general however as you can see Valve's call for action about Linux gaming is already getting responses, which is a very good development, and thanks to Valve for that.

[Guy N'wah]

gregski said:

Like you didn't have software distribution AKA app store on Linux. ›››

Big difference. So big it's not the same at all. Canonical and others aren't taking 20-30% of the gross for sales on a monopoly app store.

Linux distribution is public, free, and proven. Microsoft's app store is a monopoly, costly, and unproven.

[gregski]

Guy N said:

Big difference. So big it's not the same at all. Canonical and others aren't taking 20-30% of the gross for sales on a monopoly app store.

Linux distribution is public, free, and proven. Microsoft's app store is a monopoly, costly, and unproven. ›››

But, ummm, what about Google and Android, then?

And if MS having an app store for Windows RT (thus mobile) devices is a monopoly, it's not anything else than Google and Apple are doing. It's not even the most costly one.

On Windows 8 (Pro) it's not a monopoly at all.

[Guy N'wah]

Show me the competing stores that sell Metro applications. Show me the free Metro applications. What Microsoft's done is to shove all of its competition to the back of the bus.

Windows 8 isn't just a mobile OS with limited capability the way Android is. It's supposed to replace all the desktops that now run Windows 7 and earlier. Microsoft's objective is to replace all those desktops with software purchased exclusively from Microsoft.

Android isn't Linux. Maybe it used to be, but its purpose is entirely divergent. There's no point of commonality where you can begin comparing them.

[gregski]

Guy N said:

Show me the competing stores that sell Metro applications. Show me the free Metro applications. What Microsoft's done is to shove all of its competition to the back of the bus.

Windows 8 isn't just a mobile OS with limited capability the way Android is. It's supposed to replace all the desktops that now run Windows 7 and earlier. Microsoft's objective is to replace all those desktops with software purchased exclusively from Microsoft.

Android isn't Linux. Maybe it used to be, but its purpose is entirely divergent. There's no point of commonality where you can begin comparing them. ›››

The free Metro applications are right in the store, there's even a "Free" category (at least it was when I was using Windows 8 some time ago.

Now, about Windows 8 replacing all the desktops running Windows 7. It's probably going to happen, but there are 2 versions of Windows 8.

Windows RT - it's dedicated for mobile devices with ARM processors, mostly tablets/hybrid devices. This version is restricted to Metro applications only because of its architecture and the fact it supports only ARM processors. So Windows RT is basically something like iOS on iPad - which also doesn't allow any other app stores and applications.

Windows 8 - it's running on a different kernel and is compatible with x86 processors. This is the Windows 8 version you will see on laptops or PCs and this one is not limited to Metro applications and MS app store. You can run Steam or any other competing app store you want on devices with Windows 8.

So, while I'm not against Linux because I don't use it and probably never will, I am against the argument that MS is trying to "replace all those desktops with software purchased exclusively from Microsoft" because it's just not true. On desktops you have Windows 8 where you can run and purchase any software you want from any source you choose. MS app store is just an addition there, probably rarely used by desktop users.

[Guy N'wah]

No, I do not agree that that is Microsoft's intent. Microsoft's intent is to make the Desktop difficult to use and thereby promote use of exclusively "Windows 8" (they can't call them Metro; they forgot somebody else had a trademark on it) applications on desktop PCs. They can enforce that on Windows RT, though they have little chance of enforcing it on desktop Windows 8. All they can do is make the Desktop hidden and difficult to use, which they have done superbly.

Yes, they have some little apps in the free category. Do you think we will ever see anything that competes with Microsoft applications directly, like Libre Office? No way.

[Gilrond]

MS does try to limit competition, especially on Windows RT. They bascially copy Apple's approach. Apple bans competing browsers on iOS, and even those which are allowed there (which use Apple's WebKit) are limited in performance in comparison to Apple's mobile browser. MS does the same with "Metro" (they dropped that name already as Guy N'wah pointed out). Their own browser is privileged to run native code and etc. Competitors are reduced to running bytecode based something. It's a clear anticompetitve shift (not that MS suffered from lack of such attitude before, but in the mobile sphere it only gets worse).

Speaking about desktops, in usability, KDE and other modern Linux desktop environments leave Windows 8 in the dust. With more games coming for Linux in the near future, many Windows users will start wondering what's the point in using Windows altogether, when there are better alternatives. MS might have intended to push users from Windows desktop to Windows mobile, but it can backfire on them with pushing users to Linux desktop instead. Treating their own users with degrading usability is not wise.

[gregski]

Guy N said:

No, I do not agree that that is Microsoft's intent. Microsoft's intent is to make the Desktop difficult to use and thereby promote use of exclusively "Windows 8" (they can't call them Metro; they forgot somebody else had a trademark on it) applications on desktop PCs. They can enforce that on Windows RT, though they have little chance of enforcing it on desktop Windows 8. All they can do is make the Desktop hidden and difficult to use, which they have done superbly.

Yes, they have some little apps in the free category. Do you think we will ever see anything that competes with Microsoft applications directly, like Libre Office? No way. ›››

Yes I know about the Metro trademark, but I don't care, it's MS that will get in trouble if they use it, not me.

About their intent to make desktop difficult to use - it's difficult for some, others find Windows 8 as much productive as Win 7. It's a matter of taste I guess. I usually tend not to fall into conspiracy theories and I won't do it this time either.

One more question before I back out of your Linux playground guys, I don't want to be off-topic here with Windows 8 issues.

If MS wants to lock up everything, why would they even bother to make Surface Pro, you know, a tablet with x86 processor capable of running your ordinary, legacy applications? When talking about it, they actually underline the fact that you can use non-Metro applications on it and it's one of the main selling points of the device?

[Gilrond]

They did lock Surface (ARM) bootloader with UEFI "Secure Boot" which you can't disable, and therefore can't install other OSes on the tablet. Not sure about the Pro (Intel based) though. Can you disable that lock there? If yes, you can argue that MS doesn't want to lock you in. But if you can't - that would mean exactly that.

On the regular PCs, MS under pressure agreed that UEFI "Secure Boot" should be optional. PC was always open enough so even though they attempted to lock it up - it didn't work so far (because many pushed back), but in the tablets sphere MS tightens the grip.

[gregski]

Gilrond said:

They did lock Surface (ARM) bootloader with UEFI "Secure Boot" which you can't disable, and therefore can't install other OSes on the tablet. Not sure about the Pro (Intel based) though. Can you disable that lock there? If yes, you can argue that MS doesn't want to lock you in. But if you can't - that would mean exactly that. ›››

We were talking about applications being tied to one app store, not OS being locked to manufacturer's hardware, so I don't know why you're coming with this argument. And I don't know why would Microsoft let anyone install other OS on devices made by MS and designed to work with a specific OS. Mobile devices are more firmly tied with the OS than PCs. Can you install iOS or Windows on Android tablets?

[Gilrond]

It's just another aspect of the same problem - lock in.

Quote

And I don't know why would Microsoft let anyone install other OS on devices made by MS and designed to work with a specific OS

Because not allowing it willingly is probably a violation of antitrust laws which explicitly forbid product tying. MS usually gets away with ignoring these laws though.

Quote

Mobile devices are more firmly tied with the OS than PCs.

Not really, it's often the case just because you can't find drivers for running other OSes on many devices, since manufacturers made drivers for specific OSes only and they are closed, so you can't recreate them for other systems. So this tying is purely artificial and there is no logic reason for it besides attempts to prevent competition and de-facto lack of drivers. Whenever drivers or open hardware specifications are available - ports of open operating systems can be made.

In essence mobile computers aren't too different from PCs - they are computers too, just with different CPU architectures than Intel (commonly ARM or MIPS) and different form factors. There is nothing mandating that only specific operating system can enable working with these computers, except de-facto barriers which are caused by manufacturers and OS vendors which ship these devices.

[gregski]

Gilrond said:

Because not allowing it willingly is probably a violation of antitrust laws which explicitly forbid product tying. MS usually gets away with ignoring these laws though. ›››

So it seems Google and Apple are violating them too. You didn't answer my question - can you install iOS and Windows on Android devices?

[Guy N'wah]

gregski said:

So it seems Google and Apple are violating them too. You didn't answer my question - can you install iOS and Windows on Android devices? ›››

Anticompetitive practices are not by themselves violations of antitrust laws. Having a monopoly is not by itself a violation of antitrust laws. Both having a monopoly and using anticompetitive practices to create or perpetuate that monopoly are needed to create a violation.

Microsoft is the only company that enjoys a practical monopoly in the computing industry today. Therefore practices that Apple or Google may be able to get away with, may be forbidden to Microsoft. Open specifications and interfaces that may be demanded of Microsoft, may not be demanded of Apple or Google.

[Gilrond]

gregski said:

So it seems Google and Apple are violating them too. You didn't answer my question - can you install iOS and Windows on Android devices? ›››

Sure, in theory why not. For that Apple will need to get drivers for these particular devices intended for iOS, adopt iOS for those devices (i.e. porting, recompiling and etc.) and that's it. Anyone else besides Apple certainly can't do it, since iOS is a closed source operating system (as well as Windows for that matter). And you can't do any hardware adaptation for the closed source, if you don't own it. Apple indeed is extremely anticompetitive. They get away with it, with an excuse that they don't represent the whole market, so when they lock out other systems from their devices, you can just get other devices. They still lock you out from theirs.

[freakie1one]

Harumph! Damned open source stuff is going to ruin this world! You can't just go around giving away operating systems and other applications for free! What's this world coming to? *end fake rant*

I still do not understand the general hate people have towards open source software. Is it because all the cool kids use Windows or Macs and you can't be a cool kid if not?

[Gilrond]

Nope, these days cool kids use Linux. But that depends on definition of "cool". Amongst technical students Linux is used a lot.

[Gilrond]

At FOSDEM 2013, Wine project developers spoke about working on DX10/DX11 support as a long term effort.

https://fosdem.org/2...eynote_2013.pdf

[Gilrond]

Steam for Linux is now officially out (not beta anymore). GOG should really start working on it now as well.

http://store.steampo....com/news/9943/

[Gilrond]

In the other thread the subject of ease of using OpenGL vs Direct3D was mentioned. Here is a great video on the subject:

https://www.youtube....nOAjrtk&t=2m20s

[Costin Moroianu]

Read this from Carmack, doesn't mention ease of OpenGL but does make some key points about OpenGL vs Direct3D

http://www.bit-tech....better-opengl/1