Gaming on Linux - With WENDELL from Level1Techs!

[TheFlyingSquirrel]

24 minutes ago, alextulu said:

With all the problems, that Windows 10 has, it's still easier than Linux.

In what sense?

 

Remove gaming from the equation and Linux is a all round better solution, a package manager can install everything you need without much effort, especially of the Arch-linux side which isn't limited to application version.

[Stefan Payne]

Sauron, you don't need to sell me on Linux.

I've used it myself for a couple of weeks or months, before going back to Windows. Its not that I didn't use it, its that I don't like it!

I don't even need it for most of my machines but I don't really have a choice with all those things I don't like on Linux.

 

As for Gaming on Linux, I started up my MAC Machine:

102 Games of 303 on OSX

78 Games of 303 on Linux

303 Games of 303 on Windows :-)

And that is the point.

For you it might be different, but especially in my case, with the games that I like, Linux is not an option. I don't like most of the AAA PC Games. And thus most of the Games I want to play I have to do that either on Windows or Playstation.

 

 

15 hours ago, Sauron said:

Partly this and partly the fact that windows is structured in a way that makes UI customization inherently harder.

Or just a design decision going back 23 Years and more because M$ does not Break compatibility, if it is avoidable.

The Linux dudes do, wich is also kinda a Problem for some users and causes Problems...

 

Quote

I mean you could just... open the folder with vlc...

Could you pls stop downplaying the issues and admit it? That would be very helpful, thank you.

Because what if I don't know if I want to watch the show?

 

Quote

I use media players a bit differently, generally I don't need (or want) them to act as file managers.

And here we go again...

A Programm on Windows has an awesome feature, the Linux guys have to downplay it and call it irrelevant...

I hate that...

It isn't helpful and doesn't change my oppionion of Linux, it just hardens it.

 

If you really want to change my mind, you could show me a programm that I don't know of that can do the things I want it to do. That would be helpful.

Or you could contact your Linux buddys and tell he guys developing the Video Apps, that this is an awesome feature and it would be awesome if they would implement it. That would be helpful

 

But the apple mindset and telling me "You're doin it wrong, m8!" does not help at all...

And just alienates the other side.

 

Quote

Of course you can, it's very easy too. But you shouldn't, because standalone installers are one of the worst things about windows. Repositories and package managers are infinitely superior. Just look at Steam and ask yourself if you'd rather download an individual installer from a different website for every game...

That is just your oppionion and not a fact.

Repos have issues as well.

And they aren't much more than the M$ Windows Store, kinda. And here is the biggest problem: You are dependent on the Repo Maintainers. Where's the Difference if a Person or a company decides what you can and can not use on your Operating System?! There is none and its the same Problem, different bottle.

 

And that isn't what we want. We want to install everything we want to and having a hard specification for an installer is helpful because you aren't depent on a 3rd party for the programm you want to use!

 

And ever heard about GOG?? 

Gog does exactly that what you say is not good. Although Steam does as well. As does Uplay, Origin. It is just hidden behind the UI and automatic on Windows.

 

Quote

You don't rehabilitate a drug addict by giving them more drugs. Linux distributions don't focus on being a windows clone (well, most don't - and you're free to make a windows clone linux distro if you want...) but rather on being good operating systems. Attracting new users is important, sure, but not at the cost of integrity and quality. The linux community is not there to convert you to a cult.

See, that is the Problem with you Linux guys. 

Windows users usually aren't following the "Cult of Microsoft", many don't even like Windows and want to use something different. To alienate those guys is the stupidest thing you can do. And you'r analogy is crap as well.

 

Lets take a better one:
You don't change the Controls of a car without a good reason. And because of that, most cars have very similar controls because that is what People do expect. For example many Cars have the Light Switch on the Blinker Switch, some have a stand alone light switch. But all Cars have the same controls for Windshield wipers, front and back, Full beam and Blinker. Every Car that I know of (even Mazda RX7 FC) has the same controls for most of those and the differences are pretty minor.

 

Windows is not a Drug, that's stupid to think that way, its just a means to start the Programs you want. And, as I said and you can see everywhere, that there are many people who want to use something else. And some people, like me, could even use Linux for some of their machines - but the Linux guys don't make it easy to do that for various reasons...

 

And I'm not talking about the UI, I'm talking about the Shortcuts to do nice things. I bet you don't even know what the Shortcuts do, that I listed.

 

So I have to ask you: What do these Shortcuts do:

 Win+Arrow Keys, 
 Win+R, 
 Win+E, 
 Win+D, 
 Win+P 

Without knowing that you know what those are for, any further discussion makes no sense at all.

 

And if Linux Desktop Enviroments aren't Windows Clones, why the hello do they look like Windows Clones?

Cinnamon uses the old Windows 95 (+IE4) - Vista Startbar. The same with MATE, LXDE, XFCE, hell even KDE.

Windows 7 made it way way better its not something that has been implemented in most Desktop Enviroments at all.

 

They all implement many features of Windows, so that one could say that your statement "Linux doesn't want to creat a Windows Clone" is just wrong. Many do. They are just way behind. LXDE last time I check felt like Windows 98 or so...

 

Quote

They're there to make something THEY like to use. If you don't like it, that's fine too

And that is the Problem of Linux...

because of this mindset, they closed themselves off of feedback from Users like me, that want to make Linux better with their criique. its not like its impossible to implement the things I'd like to see (well, Win+P might be, but the others not!) or even hard at all!

 

But what can you do, if you don't want to sell your car to people who drive "normal cars" all the time because you think it is an awesome idea to make completely different controls.

 

 

Quote

When you look under the hood most of the "good things" windows offers come down to wider software compatibility and some decent apis. The first depends on software houses and the community can't do anything about that. The latter is being worked on and is making significant progress all the time.

And because it has _ONE_ Company that controls it all and that can (sometimes) tell the other departments to do it how they want it to. You don't have that with Linux.

 

The Kernel Team can not tell the Desktop Enviroments how to implement their APIs or anything, they are completely independent of each other. Wich is a Problem.

 

Quote

Samba shares are pretty easy on Linux too, you just need some dedicated tools (unless you are willing to use the command line, which works well enough too).

That does help me in what way exactly?
You come around like an Apple Fan telling me that I am doing it wrong.

If you know so much about Linux and aren't a follower of a cult, why don't you tell me what I could do instead, what tools I could use?

 

Because that would prove my point that there is no real cooperation between the different teams? Like the SAMBA Team and the File Explorer Team.

 

Quote

Again... who says windows shortcuts are good?

Hardcore Windows Users.

And who says car Controls are good?

 

And they are in the majority. so pandering to them might offer a bunch of new potential users.

But you Linux Guys don't seem to want them and alienate them insted

Quote

They're what you're used to, that doesn't mean they are the best.

Yes, that is why Car Controls are almost the same, independent of Maker and Model because that is what is proven to be good and what everyone is used to.

 

You don't want to alienate people away from your car with totally different controls, now do you?

 

Quote

You mentioned KDE - well, KDE lets you remap EVERYTHING to whatever you want (including windows shortcuts if you prefer) and it lets you do a lot more via shortcut than windows ever will.

And why doesn't it offer an option in the first place? Didn't they Think about that or did they just not care??

You yourself told me many times in your post, that they don't care and what most people are used to is not the right way to do it. Yeah, right...

 

In a working, open market, your product will fail miserably because it is far from the wants and needs of the customers.

And THAT is the plus of commercial software. There are points where you can tell the developer that you don't like their product...

 

Quote

Your unwillingness to put in any effort isn't a problem with the system.

Your ad hominems are not helpful.

Because I like to try new things and have seen most usable Desktop Enviroments or Window Managers.

 

But again, you show the problem with the Linux Community:
Their unwillingnes to listen to what people who want to switch and are able to on some machines are telling you what they want/need to use Linux more often.

You don't even ignore those guys, you insult them because you believe that YOUR way of doing things is the only right one. Wich is not.

There are many things to make something. But most people are used to the other way. And that is something you don't want to see and you are, again, alienating these people, so that they never want to use Linux again!

Not helpful.

 

And your ad hominems won't ever change my mind or convince me. Because, as I said, I like to see things for myself and not listen to what other people are telling me.

 

Quote

I routinely remap shortcuts on pretty much everything because I like them a certain way, and guess which operating system doesn't let me do that? Windows.

Right because the Windows Shortcuts are superior because many people discussed it and thought about it.

And after long discussions they came to the conclusion that it is worth implementing it.

 

Again, what do those Shortcuts I mentioned do?

These are only a tiny amount of the Shortcuts Windows has or that are usable...

And that is one thing you do not do: You don't admit that the Windows Shortcuts are good and some of them are things that are not (yet) implemented in Linux. 

 

Quote

That's your opinion and I completely disagree - but there's NOTHING preventing you from using those shortcuts with KDE (or other DEs). There's a very easy to use configuration utility, too.

Yes and everyone has the right do disagree.

Though you have no right to tell me that my experience or oppinnions are not valid and should stop that and try to help the ones that are willing and able to switch to Linux but don't like it for those ideological reasons.

 

Dear Linux guys, pls jump over your shadow and do something that might possible get a bunch of users over to your side and stop alienating them and hate you!

 

Your posting made me not like Linux a bit more...

Something you should think about...

 

Quote

Except people DID buy all those systems (2000 was pretty good for a windows version by the way) because they had no choice - it's that or an outdated system that MS will eventually stop supporting and won't be handed over to the community for continued support. Sure, they may not have sold as well as 7 or xp, but that doesn't matter; they still enforced a monopoly.

And with Windows 8 you see what happens if you do something completely different. Windows 8.1 has some really good improvements like the Windows Explorer (File Manager) and other stuff like the Indroduction of the "Win+P" kombination.

But it is reduced to the Start Menu for whatever reason.

Still it is a good OS with some nice improvements. The Startmenu was just something that was too radical for most people...

 

Quote

If you use Windows you're at the mercy of Microsoft which could change literally anything with an update, without warning or room for choice. If you don't like Windows 10, guess what? You're stuck with 7 or 8.1, which not only were significantly changed with updates (if you don't update regularly you're begging for ransomware) but will also be phased out in the next few years until you can only use 10.

Yes and its the same with Linux, where some people think its a good idea to change APIs from a 1.0 to a 1.1 release and make it totally incompatible with existing software. Microsoft does not do that.

 

And, as you said, I am able to choose to not buy the software and tell them with that that i don't like it. 

And with Windows 8 the things the people said about the OS was heard by Microsoft and they changed the thing the people didn't like...

 

Quote

EVERY program you use routinely depends on some sort of API, and that's the biggest reason a lot of stuff was never ported to Linux - the API dependencies were just too many. DirectX is an API, Vulkan is an API, .NET is an API/framework. So yes, you DO care even if you don't know it.

No, I don't

I only care about if I can use the Programm I want and if it makes stuff easier for me or not.

Linux does not make things easier for me, that is the reason I don't use it. Windows does...

 

And OSX is in a world of its own. It has some plus sides but also some negatives (I think that ² <- that isn't possible on OSX. One of the things you might want to use is not on the keyboard)

 

Sad thing:

I've used OSX by far longer than I have ever used any Linux. Especially on the good old PowerMAC G4!

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Sauron]

@Stefan Payne I'm not trying to convince you to use linux, I just strongly disagree with almost everything you said. I think I've explained my position so answering further would just throw us in an endless "yes! no!" loop - in general I think you're missing the point of what linux users like about linux and that you have a skewed perception of what makes a good OS.

 

Either way, if you like windows then by all means keep using it; I believe people should be able to choose what software to run on their system and it would be hypocritical to restrict that choice to software I personally like.

[Guest]

Very nice. Great to see Wendell. 

[pipnina]

5 hours ago, Stefan Payne said:

And if Linux Desktop Enviroments aren't Windows Clones, why the hello do they look like Windows Clones?

Cinnamon uses the old Windows 95 (+IE4) - Vista Startbar. The same with MATE, LXDE, XFCE, hell even KDE.

Windows 7 made it way way better its not something that has been implemented in most Desktop Enviroments at all.

 

They all implement many features of Windows, so that one could say that your statement "Linux doesn't want to creat a Windows Clone" is just wrong. Many do. They are just way behind. LXDE last time I check felt like Windows 98 or so...

The vista startbar, you say?

 

Of course, certain design styles will be based off windows in the modern age. In much the same way that IOS and Android look kinda similar, there are some things that just make sense and so everyone does it. Although some desktop environments are very different to windows, stock gnome is a very alien experience for a windows user, as would be a tiling wm.

 

I'm not trying to convince you on Linux at this point, but I just have to remind you that most Linux desktop environments will have done most of the "windows inventions" first.

[Stefan Payne]

41 minutes ago, pipnina said:

The vista startbar, you say?

No, I said Windows 95 with Internet Explorer 4 up until Vista!

The Windows 95 Startbar with the IE4 Extension (somewhere around 1997) was essentially the same and only got some minor changes up until Windows Vista, for wich they changed the Start button and color theme, as they did with Windows XP. Yeah...

But Taskbar wasn't changed much in those days, the Start menu was changed with Windows XP, but not Vista.

 

 

Quote

Of course, certain design styles will be based off windows in the modern age.

Exactly 

and why not go the whole mile and make the transition from Windows to Linux as painless as possible?

I don't mean any changes on the UI, Cinnamon is mostly fine, even KDE.

I mean stuff like right click on the taskbar, some shortkeay and I would be happy. Its not that much stuff I want.

 

I understand that implementing "Win+P" wouldn't be easy and impractical, I'm not really talking about that. I'm talking mostly about Windows + Arrowkeys and joning two windows together.

 

Did you know, that if you adjust the size of one window, you automatically adjust the other one too??

 

Quote

Although some desktop environments are very different to windows, stock gnome is a very alien experience for a windows user, as would be a tiling wm.

Stock Gnome = OSx Dock rotated and put the DOCK to the left screen...

And the Apple users are the ones Linux wouldn't be able to convince them of Linux anyway, its Windows Users like Me that are willing but unable to switch to Linux because its just made for ease of use.

 

I gave you a couple of examples like some shortcuts that are extremely helpful (Win+SHIFT+Arrowkeys!) but non existant on Linux. And on some Desktop Enviroments you have to click the Maximize Button if you want to move the Wndow around (LXDE, AFAIR also LXQT)

 

Quote

I'm not trying to convince you on Linux at this point, but I just have to remind you that most Linux desktop environments will have done most of the "windows inventions" first.

Stop the Propaganda, that is just an outright lie.

The Gnome and KDE Desktop started around 1999 or 2000, early releases a bit before that.

But lets start with this Link:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/K_Desktop_Environment_1

Windows 95 was released in 1995, as the Name Sugest. KDE1, wich looks like a ripoff of Windows 95

 

So there is no way in hell that Windows 95 was inspired by Linux in any way. 

But the Linux Desktop Enviroments were based on Windows 95, as you can clearly see with KDE 1.0.

Can't get any closer than that, can you?

 

But there is another OS where M$ could get a bunch of inspiration:
Mac OS 7. The old, Classic one.

And OS/2 that was developed together with IBM, wich is why IBM had a working Windows 3 emulation or you could run Windows 3 in OS2  (depending on the OS/2 Version).

 

The only thing that Linux had were virtual desktops and stuff like that. But nobody really cares about that, even today.

 

At the time when Windows 95 came out, Linux was just not usable for endusers, too complicated, no tools to help the enduser, except for Yast in the good old Suse Distributions.

And yes, I even used Linux or rather tried to use Linux back in those days when Suse 6.3 was a thing...

 

I even used OS/2 Warp4 at one time and it was awesome. And because I had a Matrox G400 at the time, I even had working Graphics Drivers!

So its not that I am totally new to that stuff, its just that it wasn't something that could keep me.

[TheFlyingSquirrel]

@Stefan Payne  Arch-linux user chiming in.  I agree with you.  Linux presents issues for non-techies from the get go, and really should only be approached by the intellectually curious, and technically savvy.

 

The majority of newbies don't even understand the difference between rolling release and major releases.  Let alone how to use a terminal. 

 

Yes once you know what you doing you get a OS that is better for 90% of non-gamers, but if the hurdles discourage you before you get there then they will never experience it.

[Master Delta Chief]

19 hours ago, TheFlyingSquirrel said:

Remove gaming from the equation and Linux is a all round better solution, a package manager can install everything you need without much effort, especially of the Arch-linux side which isn't limited to application version.

I think that's actually pretty true indeed. Most of the Linux distributions I have used were kinda lightweight and more optimised to a certain point then Windows. The ones I used were Linux Mint, Fedora and Ubuntu (though if you use the right desktop environment you should be alright.)

 

What I have noticed personally, is that when I run virtual machines on say Ubuntu, it runs a lot better and in some instances faster then that on Windows. This probably has something to do with how Windows does things differently in the background then Linux OSes.

 

But the only problems I have is that certain software I use are 'much' better on Windows then the alternatives you have on other operating systems. A known example is MS Office. Though it is currently available on MacOS and as far as I know, it's the only non-microsoft operating system that has the ability to install MS Office properly. I also game a lot and it's one of the reasons I stay 'away' from Linux. But I might change my mind one day since I start to use Linux more and more due to school. 

[Sauron]

16 minutes ago, TheFlyingSquirrel said:

@Stefan Payne  Arch-linux user chiming in.  I agree with you.  Linux presents issues for non-techies from the get go, and really should only be approached by the intellectually curious, and technically savvy.

 

The majority of newbies don't even understand the difference between rolling release and major releases.  Let alone how to use a terminal.

Arch is not what you should be measuring newbie experience against... and no, Linux is not only for the tech savvy. The willingness to learn becomes more important the more you want to do with your computer, but for the average user (who just needs a browser and a media player) none of that's really required outside of figuring out where the application menu is.

20 minutes ago, TheFlyingSquirrel said:

Yes once you know what you doing you get a OS that is better for 90% of non-gamers, but if the hurdles discourage you before you get there then they will never experience it.

Again, not every distro is Arch... if you install Mint you won't really have any hurdles to go through unless you have incompatible hardware.

1 hour ago, Stefan Payne said:

Windows 95 was released in 1995, as the Name Sugest. KDE1, wich looks like a ripoff of Windows 95

Sorry but you don't get to claim that Windows 95 invented windows on a screen and taskbars - those aren't enough to call something a windows ripoff (perhaps a xerox ripoff...). Also, KDE 1 looked nothing like windows 95.

And by the way, kde 1 had virtual desktops in 1998. Windows first got them with Windows 10 in 2015.

1 hour ago, Stefan Payne said:

nobody really cares about that, even today.

Is that why literally EVERY other operating system has had them for years and Microsoft did eventually realize they needed to add them? If you don't use them good for you, but they're one of the best and most useful features any desktop can offer.

[pipnina]

23 minutes ago, Master Delta Chief said:

What I have noticed personally, is that when I run virtual machines on say Ubuntu, it runs a lot better and in some instances faster then that on Windows. This probably has something to do with how Windows does things differently in the background then Linux OSes.

Although Linux does not run OpenGL as fast as windows, and doesn't have directx (i.e. games graphical performance is lower), the kernel is very efficient and programs that utilize a lot of file I/O or threading will run miles faster on Linux than on windows.

 

The graphs on this benchmark from 2010~ show that very well.

https://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article&item=ubuntu_win7_ws&num=4

[TheFlyingSquirrel]

1 minute ago, Sauron said:

Arch is not what you should be measuring newbie experience against... and no, Linux is not only for the tech savvy. The willingness to learn becomes more important the more you want to do with your computer, but for the average user (who just needs a browser and a media player) none of that's really required outside of figuring out where the application menu is.

Again, not every distro is Arch... if you install Mint you won't really have any hurdles to go through unless you have incompatible hardware.

Sorry but you don't get to claim that Windows 95 invented windows on a screen and taskbars - those aren't enough to call something a windows ripoff (perhaps a xerox ripoff...). Also, KDE 1 looked nothing like windows 95.

And by the way, kde 1 had virtual desktops in 1998. Windows first got them with Windows 10 in 2015.

Is that why literally EVERY other operating system has had them for years and Microsoft did eventually realize they needed to add them? If you don't use them good for you, but they're one of the best and most useful features any desktop can offer.

Let me add some context, I used Ubuntu for 4 years and Linux Mint for 2-3 years, now Arch for 1 year.  I know what newbie Linux looks like and I also know difficulties faced.

[Sauron]

2 minutes ago, TheFlyingSquirrel said:

Let me add some context, I used Ubuntu for 4 years and Linux Mint for 2-3 years, now Arch for 1 year.  I know what newbie Linux looks like and I also know difficulties faced.

I've had complete computer novices use linux systems I set up for them without any issues at all. Sure, I installed and configured it - but do you think those people would be able to install Windows by themselves? You're confusing the experience of a power user switching to Linux with the experience of someone who only does 3 things on their computer and nothing else.

[TheFlyingSquirrel]

1 minute ago, Sauron said:

I've had complete computer novices use linux systems I set up for them without any issues at all. Sure, I installed and configured it - but do you think those people would be able to install Windows by themselves? You're confusing the experience of a power user switching to Linux with the experience of someone who only does 3 things on their computer and nothing else.

 I set up for them is the optimum word.

 

I sold PCs for 2 years, and yes consumers are capable of installing windows by themselves.

[pipnina]

13 minutes ago, TheFlyingSquirrel said:

 I set up for them is the optimum word.

 

I sold PCs for 2 years, and yes consumers are capable of installing windows by themselves.

Based on my recent installs on Linux, anyone who can install windows can install Linux too.

Unless they can't remember what time zone or keyboard layout they're using.

[TheFlyingSquirrel]

23 minutes ago, pipnina said:

Based on my recent installs on Linux, anyone who can install windows can install Linux too.

Unless they can't remember what time zone or keyboard layout they're using.

Let go through a typical windows installation:

Need to install windows, Windows 10 is the current one, I install that, then I get the basic programs I, my family, my colleagues, and friends have used for over a decade.

 

Typical Linux Installation:

Want to install Linux, which version do I get?  Which environment do I use? What is the difference between them? What are the equivalent applications?  This isn't the same as xx, how does it work?

 

Windows is a holding pattern, Linux prompts question that consumers aren't generally comfortable answering without a lot of guidance.  Things would be a lot different if pre-installed newbie major release like Kubuntu 18.04 were available in store and listed all the equivalent applications and how things works in a dummy guide type user manual. 

 

At the moment you are asking Windows users to move to Linux.  If it doesn't seem broken why fix it.

[Stefan Payne]

1 hour ago, Sauron said:

I've had complete computer novices use linux systems I set up for them without any issues at all. Sure, I installed and configured it - but do you think those people would be able to install Windows by themselves?

Yes and that is another point.

If the user uses Windows like Windows 2000, doesn't know anything about Shortcuts, they have no Problem with Linux at all. I doubt they even notice a difference between Cinnamon, Mate or XFCE (=all Mint Distributions).

 

I also gave my Mother a PC with a Linux on it once - wasn't a worse experience for me than with Windows. And w/o the Passwort, I know she couldn't break anything.

 

But that is the Point, that if you know about some shortcuts in Windows and use them regularly and have a multi screen enviroment, it becomes a Problem.

 

1 hour ago, Sauron said:

You're confusing the experience of a power user switching to Linux with the experience of someone who only does 3 things on their computer and nothing else.

and I'm the Power User and tell you what happens if a Power-Windows User tries Linux...

 

OSX is a bit better in some cases but in others its worse. I like it a bit more because it does somethings I need but with todays Windows I can also only use it for a short while until it enrages me....

 

 

1 hour ago, Master Delta Chief said:

he ones I used were Linux Mint, Fedora and Ubuntu (though if you use the right desktop environment you should be alright.)

You should really give OpenSuSe a try.

 

I think I've tried Fedora but only like 5minutes. Ubuntu is also not something I like much...

With Linux Mint I have the most issues. Let me say just one Word: Auto-Updates.

Mint is the Distribution who is in need of that the most because its rather easy to use...

 

But OpenSuSe is the Distribution I liked the most for whatever reason...

Well, probably because you can install multiple Desktops and if you are fed up with Gnome, you can give KDE a Try and you can even install Cinnamon as well...

 

 

[Master Delta Chief]

10 hours ago, pipnina said:

Although Linux does not run OpenGL as fast as windows, and doesn't have directx (i.e. games graphical performance is lower), the kernel is very efficient and programs that utilize a lot of file I/O or threading will run miles faster on Linux than on windows.

 

The graphs on this benchmark from 2010~ show that very well.

https://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article&item=ubuntu_win7_ws&num=4

Yeah, it had to be something like that. If I look at it from my perspective, the Linux Kernel can/is more stable then that of Windows. Just because the fact that a lot of people can work on it since it's open source.

 

10 hours ago, Sauron said:

I've had complete computer novices use linux systems I set up for them without any issues at all. Sure, I installed and configured it - but do you think those people would be able to install Windows by themselves? You're confusing the experience of a power user switching to Linux with the experience of someone who only does 3 things on their computer and nothing else.

It's obviously true that people without the proper knowledge of computers in general won't be able to install an operating system. Then again, if you teach them how to do it, it's fairly simple. That goes for both Windows and some known Linux distributions. I think the most simplest installer to me would be the MacOS one. What I like about most of the Linux distributions installers, is that most of them include advanced options which you won't be able to find on Windows nor on MacOS (though you can actually format and do other stuff regarding your hard drive in the MacOS installer which in the Windows version is very limited UNLESS you know stuff about the command lines and so on)

 

9 hours ago, Stefan Payne said:

You should really give OpenSuSe a try.

 

I think I've tried Fedora but only like 5minutes. Ubuntu is also not something I like much...

With Linux Mint I have the most issues. Let me say just one Word: Auto-Updates.

Mint is the Distribution who is in need of that the most because its rather easy to use...

 

But OpenSuSe is the Distribution I liked the most for whatever reason...

Well, probably because you can install multiple Desktops and if you are fed up with Gnome, you can give KDE a Try and you can even install Cinnamon as well...

 

 

I'll keep that one in mind, though I never really heard much about OpenSuSe. About the auto-updates, I think there's a way to disable them on Mint (at least there should be). 

 

5 hours ago, valdyrgramr said:

As a techie with quite a bit of knowledge, I find Linux both useful yet annoying when it refuses to work.  And, it can be far more annoying than windows when it doesn't want to work.  

Another thing which I personally agree on. I've had some moments myself where certain stuff (like a driver for my Nvidia GPU) just wouldn't work and I could not be bothered with it anymore. It can be challenging on some occasions, but it's kinda of a learning experience for the techies. 

[Stefan Payne]

4 hours ago, Master Delta Chief said:

I'll keep that one in mind, though I never really heard much about OpenSuSe.

Yeah, its a bit underrated and has some nice features like multiple DE installed at once.

 

4 hours ago, Master Delta Chief said:

About the auto-updates, I think there's a way to disable them on Mint (at least there should be). 

No, you misunderstood.

It can't do that! There is no option in the Update Software to enable unattended/automatic updates.

But that is essential for your grandma's Computer or other technological Analphabets. 

 

Even some Security Experts from the Chaos Computer Congress (3 or 4 years ago, Security Nightmares wich is German, but I think there are subtitles available) admit that automatic updates are a good idea for a majority of people.

[AntiTrust]

Great video Linus and Wendell, will definitely check out lvl 1 tech

[pipnina]

7 hours ago, Stefan Payne said:

Even some Security Experts from the Chaos Computer Congress (3 or 4 years ago, Security Nightmares wich is German, but I think there are subtitles available) admit that automatic updates are a good idea for a majority of people.

That is probably true, however there are times when it is a bad idea to run updates as soon as possible.

When running the nvidia proprietary driver, if you update the driver to a new version (i.e. 384 to 390) but don't reboot, games will fail to open, until you reboot. If updates happened automatically and without user knowledge, it is more likely to break things. If automatic updates were to be introduced, they would have to be done the windows way... And the windows way is a load of bollocks tbh.

[Stefan Payne]

10 minutes ago, pipnina said:

That is probably true, however there are times when it is a bad idea to run updates as soon as possible.

I never said as soon as possible, I said automatic, unattended updates.

 

That the focus should be on security and safety updates, should be obvious...

 

Quote

When running the nvidia proprietary driver, if you update the driver to a new version (i.e. 384 to 390) but don't reboot, games will fail to open, until you reboot. If updates happened automatically and without user knowledge, it is more likely to break things. If automatic updates were to be introduced, they would have to be done the windows way... And the windows way is a load of bollocks tbh.

Yes and if there are no Automatic updates, you have shit like 1000 Days without reboot and are still on Kernel 3.9 or maybe even something worse than that because they don't know anything about that.

 

And a Graphics driver you don't need to update that much. And you can have the usual Windows Popups "Graphics Driver Update Required, please allow" and "Graphics Driver Updated, 3D Apps won't work until Restart".

 

I don't really see the issue here. It works well on M$ Windows!

Though its a bit to aggessive with WIndows 10...

 

But without Automatic upgrade, you have more problems because most not technically versed users won't ever install updates manually.

[viggy96]

On 7/24/2018 at 1:46 PM, TheFlyingSquirrel said:

This actually isn't true.

 

Both AMD and Nvidia have solid driver support, the difference is relative performance.  Nvidia has 45% to 85%(and increasing as support improves) relative windows performance, while AMD is ahead at 35% to 95% (The top end is newer cards like Vega).  When you also take into account Vulkan is based off an AMD implementation, Nvidia is behind.

 

Relative performance Linux vs Windows

https://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article&item=linux-windows-relperf&num=3

 

This is native (non-vulkan)

https://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article&item=march-2018-gpus&num=2

 

Native (vulkan)

https://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article&item=march-2018-gpus&num=6

 

 

 

NVIDIA's own driver installer doesn't work, all it does is screw up your display configuration. The community made installer for the proprietary driver actually works. That's pretty sad if you ask me. Further, getting CUDA to work is a nightmare, meanwhile, Vulkan and OpenCL is a breeze to get to work. However, if you decide to use Vulkan or OpenCL on an NVIDIA  you don't get as much performance out of the GPU as you would if you used CUDA. NVIDIA still doesn't support Wayland, which is the display manager of the future. NVIDIA doesn't care for Linux, which I find funny since, that's where all the money is, in the datacentre. 

[viggy96]

On 7/24/2018 at 1:05 PM, Firewrath9 said:

csgo is a volvo game

WTF is a 'volvo game' Don't you mean Valve...

[Firewrath9]

6 hours ago, viggy96 said:

WTF is a 'volvo game' Don't you mean Valve...

meme

its a 

[archerbob]

Is lutris broken?

 

I am trying to download and install it, but nothing works