A question to the long-term future of our community

[wreckington 10]

I just use each OS for what it's best at. Doing anything else is idiotic.

I use Linux for servers (sometimes for virtual windows servers), Windows for gaming, and iOS or android for couch computing. You can use whatever you feel like at home, but in an enterprise environment you are going to run the full range of systems (except Apple products) due to the various vendors you work with. I've never seen a facility with more than 250 computers that are not using Microsoft for AD, exchange etc.

Edited October 9, 2013 by wreckington

[dale0404 5]

Not like you have done anything to prevent this thread from drifting into a "Linux vs. Windows" discussion by posting statistics about the alleged irrelevancy of linux...

I posted that picture to prove a point, nothing more nothing less. Why would I do anything to stop this discussion from "drifting"?

[GottyPlays 10]

Bottom line: Windows is only good for simple minded people wanting to click and play, or those wanting to make a quick buck.

I have used both Windows and Linux, and still find Linux (or Open Source) to be more stable and easier to work with when compared to proprietary code. The root of all Windows' problems is basically the proprietary code and Microsoft's intentions of continually hiding debugging functions, or other useful features from users. Microsoft is in the business of selling software and hardware, not to please or provide useful features for the end user. Windows 8 has pretty much made this clear. I shudder to think the reason why we are being made to patiently wait for Windows 8.1 patch while the patch has already been pushed to retail, the patch maybe slated to break Windows 8 desktop user experience even more than when Windows 8 was first launched! Windows XP was by far the best operating system they pushed. After Windows XP, they added a mess of nonsense eye-candy, effectively ruining the desktop experience. Many were further dismayed by the handling of 32 bit to 64 bit conversion, leaving 32 bit hardware dysfunctional while the open sourced hardware drivers available under Linux were easily recompiled for 64 bit platforms. (ie. Many Windows users having hardware only using closed or proprietary sourced hardware were stuck as usual, and forced to again buy newer hardware if they chose to upgrade to newer Windows versions. But I suspect rightfully so, as they chose their own ways.)

Those stating Windows is far better than Linux, must be gamers and Microsoft only coders. As for me, I've coded under many platforms, and will choose Linux every time for development work. Albeit, CYGWIN makes Windows bearable to work with for when a programmer is forced to work on Windows. But they're still plagued with having to escape the forbidding non-printing chars on command line console. (ie. I tend to create a Bash alias for change such directories, ie alias cd-arma='/cygwin/c/Windows/Program\ Files\ \(x86\) ....') It's what forces Windows users' to depend explicitly on the GUI, versus using the CLI. (ie. Command line interface, typing on the command line for those that know how to type, is usually much faster than those hunting for menu GUI items, with less mouse clicks.)

Bottom line, when the Bible was Open Sourced with the King James version, did it make the world better or worse? I also think both open source and proprietary code have useful features, but the end user will likely have more choices when using Open Sourced code. Basically the choice of living an honest life, versus a life of hiding in the dark.

I work as a soundproducer...and my setup is supported only on windows. i dare you to find me an alternative with linux. i even tried ubuntu for a couple of months, yes it's a good os if you plan to use it to surf the internet and if you are a programmer with loads of free time..loads of issues with support of hardware, it took me 1 week to install drivers for my printer, and i never fixed issues with my old rig because the old graphic card were not supported.

and good luck if you are a neophyte with the os, because there is no tech support beside the forum..it took a week to realize that my hardware simply were not supported..if this is living in a honest life i'm sticking into living in the dark age where everything is supposed to work as intended..

..simple minded people my ass!

don't act like a hipster, if people prefer windows or mac it's not their fault.

Edited October 9, 2013 by GottyPlays

[novemberist 2]

I posted that picture to prove a point, nothing more nothing less. Why would I do anything to stop this discussion from "drifting"?

No problem with that picture at all, but you complained about something you have caused yourself by shifting the point of the discussion towards evaluating which OS has the bigger balls. We can discuss this, here or off-topic, but don't act like you didn't want to in the first place.

I see no point in arguing against a Linux port for coming Arma titles, since none of you Windows zealots will be forced to abandon their beloved OS because of that. If we could satisfy everyone's needs, why not? No need to be resentful just because Linux users are finally getting something to play...

I work as a soundproducer...and my setup is supported only on windows. i dare you to find me an alternative with linux

This is very off-topic now and I don't know what kind of setup you require, but since I do a lot of audio editing and (semi-professional) music composition on linux myself: Have you ever heard of the Jack audio server, Ardour, Rosegarden, LMMS, Renoise, Linuxsampler, LADSPA, LV2 etc.? Can't think of anything you couldn't possibly do with those software (even professionally) if you invested some time in induction.

edit. for printer drivers, see gutenprint...I doubt your printer is not supported. graphic card drivers and support for exotic hardware are another story, though. But there's almost nothing you can't solve and I have never had any problems with my hardware so far.

Edited October 9, 2013 by novemberist

[chortles 263]

Let's put it this way: There are gamers here who do not have confidence in BI's ability to support development and maintenance for two versions of Arma for two OS's (especially when not developing and maintaining multiple versions was one of the stated development benefits of going Steamworks!), and the OP coming off as highly disingenuous didn't make us any more sympathetic to the idea.

[iceman77 18]

@Rogerx - I agree. I'm simple minded & I love windows 7. I will never want to get eyeball deep into my OS. I simply come home, and run a game.exe or browse the internet. Nothing more for me. So windows is great as far as I'm concerned because it serves it's purpose for me personally. If you're into the things / line of work you're into, I can see the advantages of linux.

[novemberist 2]

Let's put it this way: There are gamers here who do not have confidence in BI's ability to support development and maintenance for two versions of Arma for two OS's (especially when not developing and maintaining multiple versions was one of the stated development benefits of going Steamworks!), and the OP coming off as highly disingenuous didn't make us any more sympathetic to the idea.

Now I don't know anything about the technical side of it and how much effort it would be, but come on...small indie developers can manage to maintain and support their games for multiple platforms. Why would BI not be able to?

It's not like they would have to make 2 entirely different games. As the OP already suggested, you can always hire a third party developer for such tasks.

After all, there is absolutely no need for the blessing or sympathy of the Windows using part of the community. The only important question is: Would there be enough demand for a Linux version to make porting profitable. (Meaning people that would not buy Arma unless there was a Linux port) I doubt it, because most Arma fans would probably never refrain from buying the game, even if it meant wasting a whole partition with Windows on it...I know I would not buy it, if 5 or 6 years from now Arma 4 came without a Linux version...

@Rogerx - I agree. I'm simple minded & I love windows 7. I will never want to get eyeball deep into my OS. I simply come home, and run a game.exe or browse the internet. Nothing more for me. So windows is great as far as I'm concerned because it serves it's purpose for me personally. If you're into the things / line of work you're into, I can see the advantages of linux.

If you have learned to play Arma, you won't have any problems learning Linux, believe me ;)

[chortles 263]

Now I don't know anything about the technical side of it and how much effort it would be, but come on...small indie developers can manage to maintain and support their games for multiple platforms. Why would BI not be able to?

Because they already have a hard enough time doing that for even one platform? :rolleyes:

[novemberist 2]

Because they already have a hard enough time doing that for even one platform? :rolleyes:

Can't disagree, but I think those are very different issues from maintaining the port for another OS. Let's have some confidence in BI here, this won't happen anytime soon anyways and until then there will be a new engine, probably a new Windows, entirely different hardware and who knows what...

And since you mentioned Steam...since they have already made this step, this is the best groundwork for distributing a potential Linux version you could possibly have.

For now I just hope we can get Arma3 running with Wine soon, so I can enjoy my favorite OS and my favorite game in one session...But I of course hope they make it work properly on Windows first ;)

[dale0404 5]

No problem with that picture at all, but you complained about something you have caused yourself by shifting the point of the discussion towards evaluating which OS has the bigger balls. We can discuss this, here or off-topic, but don't act like you didn't want to in the first place.

Right hold on. I still don't know how posting a picture which illustrates the number of users of certain OS has anything to do with balls. I have not done any complaining so do not turn this into something that it isn't.

[rogerx 11]

Let's put it this way: There are gamers here who do not have confidence in BI's ability to support development and maintenance for two versions of Arma for two OS's (especially when not developing and maintaining multiple versions was one of the stated development benefits of going Steamworks!), and the OP coming off as highly disingenuous didn't make us any more sympathetic to the idea.

This thread is about implementing DirectX 11's "D3D11CreateDeviceAndSwapChain" into Wine (emulation), as well as fixing Wine to fully run the ARMA 3 game. Not about maintaining two different branches of source code. And usually when an application does port code to a different platform, they contract an outside contractor. (ie. icculus.org)

When an application is run through Wine, Wine merrily translates all system calls to Linux system calls. In essence, Wine isn't an emulator but a middle layer between the Windows application and the operating system, and most times increasing application performance.

However that said, NVidia seems to do fine with maintaining many native branches of their driver source code for many Operating Systems. (ie. Windows Versions, Linux, Solaris, ...)

The initial post within this thread was quite specific and well written, to include all issues including copyright preservation issues. (ie. Steam seems to solve most copyright concerns, providing support for multiple O/S's)

Currently, Steam and the initial loading of ARMA 3 works under Linux Wine. But there's likely several more unimplemented (D3D) Wine features preventing the game from running under Wine.

The initial post also iterated the fact once the game is available under Wine (or natively), the market share will likely be increased.

NOTE: I likely won't loose any sleep if the Wine code isn't fixed, as there other downsides with increased popularity. (ie. Increased popularity usually means increased vulnerabilities to computer viruses, etc.) I also previously stated having the game run under Wine, I can gain far quicker access to crash dumps or the cause of crashes via command line, when compared to Windows 8 crash dumps, or any Windows versions. The benefits go even further with easier virtual desktop support, system and driver stability, etc. Also, having a code base run on multiple operating systems, bugs can be more quickly narrowed down. Lots of benefits.

Edited October 10, 2013 by rogerx

[defk0n_NL 2]

Let's put it this way: There are gamers here who do not have confidence in BI's ability to support development and maintenance for two versions of Arma for two OS's (especially when not developing and maintaining multiple versions was one of the stated development benefits of going Steamworks!), and the OP coming off as highly disingenuous didn't make us any more sympathetic to the idea.

Hell, they cant even finish one version of ArmaA.

I am actually kinda surprised by the people not asking for their money at this point.

This should have been release version. But instead, Alot of clothing missing or duplicated. random physx crashes, etc. the list is quite big.

[novemberist 2]

This thread is about implementing DirectX 11's "D3D11CreateDeviceAndSwapChain" into Wine (emulation), as well as fixing Wine to fully run the ARMA 3 game. Not about maintaining two different branches of source code. And usually when an application does port code to a different platform, they contract an outside contractor. (ie. icculus.org)

If this thread is really just about that, It should be renamed, cleaned up and maybe merged with my existing thread about Arma 3 on Wine, so that people from BI and other users can quickly see what it's about. I'm all in favor of semi-official Arma 3 support for Wine, however, evaluation of a native solution should always have priority. If nor Arma 3 at least for future BI titles.

As I already mentioned, Arma tactics has a Linux version, so that's a good sign BI are not ignoring Linux completely.

[chortles 263]

See what defk0n_NL said -- right now "native solution" is a non-starter, whereas something for WINE is more plausible.

[novemberist 2]

See what defk0n_NL said -- right now "native solution" is a non-starter, whereas something for WINE is more plausible.

I could live with that. It's probably something the Wine developers and not BI would have to fix, though. As to what defk0n_NL said, I usually ignore these kind of rants, because I don't agree and because they don't belong in this thread.

I wished someone from BI could say something on this topic (how realistic/difficult would a native solution be, what about unofficial WINE support etc.) I'm sure they have some Linux experts among them ;)

[chortles 263]

His "rant" is indicative of the situation regarding post-release development, specifically how "a native solution" isn't even vaguely on the devs' radar for Arma 3 (again, I say this in the context of how "as few platforms as possible" was a driving force behind the Steamworks move*)... and if it is in fact "something the Wine developers and not BI would have to fix", then that's the end of that as far as BI's concern re: WINE support.

* Mind you, that drive towards "one platform only" (Steam) was even though it would already only be on Windows.

[rogerx 11]

A native source code branch of ARMA 3 for Linux would merrily just require renaming/recoding/replacing the Windows system calls (ie. functions and libraries) with Linux based system calls, etc. If I'm not mistaken, one of the more famous coders, icculus.org known for converting Windows' application/games source code to Linux, likely uses some pre-made sed/awk incantations or scripts to make the conversion quite easy. (Likely still needs to scan/recompile the code to find any warnings or errors, as every code base is different.)

As far as the current DirectX 11 "D3D11CreateDeviceAndSwapChain" not being implemented within Wine, anybody can fix this if they're familiar with the issue or implementation. This doesn't have to be a Wine Developer, and anybody can submit a patch.

If you think about it, providing a native branch (converting Windows calls to Linux calls) might be easier then trying to implement the missing DirectX 11 functions in Wine.

These issues have all been well conversed within other past threads on the Internet.