Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Gaming on Linux, what are my options?

Last response: in Video Games
Share
Anonymous
September 18, 2005 6:09:52 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.adventure,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.war-historical,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.strategic (More info?)

I am preparing to migrate from Windows to Linux. Off course I still need
to be able to do the things with Linux that I now do with Windows. Main
issue today: gaming, what are my options?

All of my games are Windows-based with some exceptions that actually
have a native Linux installer. But I still want to be able to play all
my Windows-based games when I have switched to Linux.

There are a few options to solve this "problem". I have read about Wine,
which works good for most Windows applications, but doesn't seem to do
too good with gaming.

There is Cedega, formerly known as WineX, which emulates the API's used
by DirectX. Most games should run good - some even great - on it. At
least that is what the developer says. The thing is I have not found
that many user comments/reviews about it. Another thing is that you'll
have to pay for it. Not that I am too cheap to spent money on a good
solution, but I would like to see what I am buying - a demo or some good
reviews/comments wouldn't hurt.

Than there is the CPU emulator solution (VMWare, Plex86) and run Windows
from it, but this will cost performance (and in case of VMWare; money)
because it's an OS in an OS. And loss of performance is not something we
want when we're gaming, right? :) 

Dual-boot is not an option - this will cost a lot of time booting
between OS's and HDD space for installing several OS's. Aside from that
it's too much trouble maintaining two OS's (/me is a lazy bastard :p ).

Are there any other Linux gamers in these NG's that would like to share
there experience, comments, opinions on this?

(Cross posted because the topic is genre-overlapping. Please reply to
all groups, maybe other readers are interested too :) )

--
Bow before me, for I am root.

More about : gaming linux options

September 18, 2005 6:09:53 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.adventure,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.war-historical,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.strategic (More info?)

["Followup-To:" header set to comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg.]
On 2005-09-18, Chris de Bruin <news@cdb.demon.nl-nospam> wrote:
>
> I am preparing to migrate from Windows to Linux. Off course I still need
> to be able to do the things with Linux that I now do with Windows. Main
> issue today: gaming, what are my options?
>
> All of my games are Windows-based with some exceptions that actually
> have a native Linux installer. But I still want to be able to play all
> my Windows-based games when I have switched to Linux.

As others have mentioned you're asking for trouble. Just dual
boot and be glad LILO or GRUB can be setup to boot Win XP off
another drive.

> Than there is the CPU emulator solution (VMWare, Plex86) and run Windows
> from it, but this will cost performance (and in case of VMWare; money)
> because it's an OS in an OS. And loss of performance is not something we
> want when we're gaming, right? :) 

CPU emulation is the worest. Even DOS games could run slow if
your CPU isn't blazingly fast.

I wouldn't touch Cedega though. It's a joke.
September 18, 2005 7:03:06 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.adventure,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.war-historical,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.strategic (More info?)

Chris de Bruin <news@cdb.demon.nl-nospam> wrote in news:11iqm8i3c993id0
@corp.supernews.com:
.............
> Dual-boot is not an option - this will cost a lot of time booting
> between OS's and HDD space for installing several OS's. Aside from that
> it's too much trouble maintaining two OS's (/me is a lazy bastard :p ).


One minute ten seconds to reboot too much time? (just timed my XP to Suse)

Dual boot is so easy to do, just unformat a windows partition (or shrink
one to make new unformatted space), boot with a Linux install, tell it to
use that unformatted space, install, and you're done. No muss no fuss. I
only have a 10 gig partition for Suse Linux at the moment, way more than
what I use.

I don't maintain anything, aside from an XP update occassionally.
Related resources
Anonymous
September 18, 2005 9:11:30 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.adventure,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.war-historical,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.strategic (More info?)

"magnate" <chrisc@dbass.demon.co.uk> wrote in
news:1127058952.877176.61070@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com:

<snip>
>
> So I think you only have two basic choices here:
>
> 1. Resign yourself to playing a subset of games in Linux.
>
> or
>
> 2. Resign yourself to installing and maintaining a dual-boot system
Or you can do both: play subset of games in Linux, and when (if) some great
game comes that works only on Windows, boot in Windows.

> Neither is the end of the world - there are plenty of games for Linux
> nowadays. A quick glance at my Linux install shows
>
> Dominions 2
> various roguelikes (Angband, Sangband, Oangband, Nethack)
> Sid Meier's Alpha Centauri & Alien Crossfire
> StarCraft (almost but not quite running under Wine)
> DosBox, which runs dozens of older games
>
> I'm sure there are loads of more modern games out there which run in
> Linux - I just don't have them.
And things are getting better. It seems that there's fewer and fewer good
games that don't run on Linux. Unfortunately, that's not because more good
games run on Linux, but because fewer good games seem to come out :( 

But I hope for better, maybe creative indies will embrace Linux (to reduce
development cost and time if not for anything else) and we will get more
interesting games.

Alex.
Anonymous
September 18, 2005 9:45:50 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.adventure,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.war-historical,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.strategic (More info?)

On Sun, 18 Sep 2005 14:09:52 +0200, Chris de Bruin wrote:

>
> I am preparing to migrate from Windows to Linux. Off course I still need
> to be able to do the things with Linux that I now do with Windows. Main
> issue today: gaming, what are my options?
>
> All of my games are Windows-based with some exceptions that actually
> have a native Linux installer. But I still want to be able to play all
> my Windows-based games when I have switched to Linux.
>
> There are a few options to solve this "problem". I have read about Wine,
> which works good for most Windows applications, but doesn't seem to do
> too good with gaming.
>
> There is Cedega, formerly known as WineX, which emulates the API's used
> by DirectX. Most games should run good - some even great - on it. At
> least that is what the developer says. The thing is I have not found
> that many user comments/reviews about it. Another thing is that you'll
> have to pay for it. Not that I am too cheap to spent money on a good
> solution, but I would like to see what I am buying - a demo or some good
> reviews/comments wouldn't hurt.
>
> Than there is the CPU emulator solution (VMWare, Plex86) and run Windows
> from it, but this will cost performance (and in case of VMWare; money)
> because it's an OS in an OS. And loss of performance is not something we
> want when we're gaming, right? :) 
>
> Dual-boot is not an option - this will cost a lot of time booting
> between OS's and HDD space for installing several OS's. Aside from that
> it's too much trouble maintaining two OS's (/me is a lazy bastard :p ).
>
> Are there any other Linux gamers in these NG's that would like to share
> there experience, comments, opinions on this?


You should consider a dual boot. It will cost less time than trying to get
a game to run in WineX/Cedega and you'll get much better compatibility.
If you like newer games that use the latest DirectX and if you want to get
the best out of your video card, you won't do it with WineX/Cedega. If you
like older games that aren't well known or are less popular, chances are
there will be problems with WineX/Cedega. These problems can vary from
horrible sound (static, distortion, stuttering) to cut scenes not playing
to crashing all the time to the game not even installing in the first
place. Most 3D games I could not get to play in WineX/Cedega except by
using software mode. And many newer games don't even offer a software
mode.
Anonymous
September 18, 2005 10:06:56 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.adventure,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.war-historical,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.strategic (More info?)

Chris de Bruin wrote:
> I am preparing to migrate from Windows to Linux. Off course I still
> need to be able to do the things with Linux that I now do with
> Windows. Main issue today: gaming, what are my options?

This ain't no freudian slip - "off course" pretty much sums it up :) 
>
> All of my games are Windows-based with some exceptions that actually
> have a native Linux installer. But I still want to be able to play all
> my Windows-based games when I have switched to Linux.

Given that a lot of games nowadays have problems running smoothly on
hardware AND Operating Systems they were intended to run, I'm not even going
to tell you what your options are.

Well, ok, I will cause there's only one: dual boot, period, end of story.

> Dual-boot is not an option - this will cost a lot of time booting
> between OS's and HDD space for installing several OS's. Aside from
> that it's too much trouble maintaining two OS's (/me is a lazy
> bastard :p ).

It may not be an option but what do you do when it's the only one?

Sorry kiddo, you can't have your cake and eat it too.

And lazy bastards shouldn't be allowed anywhere near a computer, anyway.
Anonymous
September 19, 2005 12:33:59 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.adventure,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.war-historical,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.strategic (More info?)

Chris de Bruin <news@cdb.demon.nl-nospam> once tried to test me with:

> I am preparing to migrate from Windows to Linux.

Sounds like a bad idea gone badder.

--

Knight37 - http://knightgames.blogspot.com

Once a Gamer, Always a Gamer.
Anonymous
September 19, 2005 1:44:02 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.adventure,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.war-historical,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.strategic (More info?)

Chris de Bruin wrote:
>
> I am preparing to migrate from Windows to Linux. Off course I still need
> to be able to do the things with Linux that I now do with Windows. Main
> issue today: gaming, what are my options?
>
> All of my games are Windows-based with some exceptions that actually
> have a native Linux installer. But I still want to be able to play all
> my Windows-based games when I have switched to Linux.
>
> There are a few options to solve this "problem". I have read about Wine,
> which works good for most Windows applications, but doesn't seem to do
> too good with gaming.
>
> There is Cedega, formerly known as WineX, which emulates the API's used
> by DirectX. Most games should run good - some even great - on it. At
> least that is what the developer says. The thing is I have not found
> that many user comments/reviews about it. Another thing is that you'll
> have to pay for it. Not that I am too cheap to spent money on a good
> solution, but I would like to see what I am buying - a demo or some good
> reviews/comments wouldn't hurt.
>
> Than there is the CPU emulator solution (VMWare, Plex86) and run Windows
> from it, but this will cost performance (and in case of VMWare; money)
> because it's an OS in an OS. And loss of performance is not something we
> want when we're gaming, right? :) 
>
> Dual-boot is not an option - this will cost a lot of time booting
> between OS's and HDD space for installing several OS's. Aside from that
> it's too much trouble maintaining two OS's (/me is a lazy bastard :p ).

So how exactly is using VMWare to run Windows inside Linux going to use
less space than a dual-boot setup? It'll also be at least as much work
to maintain as a dual-boot system.

An 80 GB disk will cost you a lot less than a legit copy of VMWare, and
sticking in your system to boot to when you want to play games will work
just fine. As another guy pointed out, it only takes a minute or so to
reboot, which is much better than the performance hit your machine will
take running Windows inside a virtual machine.
September 19, 2005 1:44:03 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.adventure,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.war-historical,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.strategic (More info?)

["Followup-To:" header set to comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg.]
On 2005-09-18, Arjuna <dave@panthergames.com> wrote:
> Our Highway to the Reich ( HTTR ) WW2 op wargame runs under Linux using
> Cedega. CHeck out this forum post:
>
> http://www.matrixgames.com/default.asp?URL=http%3A//www...
>

The problem is it may not in the future work with Cedega. At any
one time there are 3-5 games which work perfectly with any
release of Cedega.
Anonymous
September 19, 2005 4:37:27 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

alexti wrote:
> But I hope for better, maybe creative indies will embrace Linux (to
reduce
> development cost and time if not for anything else) and we will get more
> interesting games.

Well, Loki was one company dedicated to porting good games to Linux.
Guess what: they are dead now. The market is simply not there - yet.

Harald

--
_______________________________________________________________________
"Never ascribe to malice, that which can be explained by incompetence."
- Napoleon Bonaparte
September 19, 2005 4:37:28 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

["Followup-To:" header set to comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg.]
On 2005-09-18, Harald Lauer <drs.lauer@t-online.de> wrote:
> alexti wrote:
> > But I hope for better, maybe creative indies will embrace Linux (to
> reduce
>> development cost and time if not for anything else) and we will get more
>> interesting games.
>
> Well, Loki was one company dedicated to porting good games to Linux.
> Guess what: they are dead now. The market is simply not there - yet.

Loki's issue is that it ported games some six months after the
game was released. Sometimes years after. Games rely heavily on
marketting. Whether you like it or not it's all the previews,
ads, and banners that get us to buy games.

Seriously, half of this NG is already going to buy the next Elder
Scrolls and City of Villians. Heck, they probably preordered it.
Anonymous
September 19, 2005 5:11:56 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

Thusly Knight37 <knight37m@gmail.com> Spake Unto All:

>> I am preparing to migrate from Windows to Linux.
>
>Sounds like a bad idea gone badder.

Truth.

Anyone who plays games and describes himself as a "lazy bastard" don't
want to run linux. It is not the lazy gamers OS at all.
Anonymous
September 19, 2005 3:50:38 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.adventure,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.war-historical,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.strategic (More info?)

"BuckFush" <notmyre@laddress.com> writes:

> And lazy bastards shouldn't be allowed anywhere near a computer, anyway.

Little late for that, methinks.

No reason not to migrate to Linux for most applications. Ubuntu has
great hardware support, and the Synaptic package manager is simple to
use.

For gaming, buy a console or two with the money you will save from not
having to buy the next version of Windows and Microsoft Office.

PC gaming is still not for the faint-of-heart, and probably never
really will be.

Nick

--
#include<stdio.h> /* sigmask (sig.c) 20041028 PUBLIC DOMAIN */
int main(c,v)char *v;{return !c?putchar(* /* cc -o sig sig.c */
v-1)&&main(0,v+1):main(0,"Ojdl!Wbshjti!=ojdlAwbshjti/psh?\v\1");}
Anonymous
September 19, 2005 6:45:32 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg (More info?)

shadows wrote:

>Loki's issue is that it ported games some six months after the
>game was released. Sometimes years after. Games rely heavily on
>marketting. Whether you like it or not it's all the previews,
>ads, and banners that get us to buy games.
>
>

I have never bought a game based on any of that.



--
Godwin is a net-nazi
Anonymous
September 19, 2005 11:53:23 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.adventure,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.war-historical,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.strategic (More info?)

On 19 Sep 2005 11:50:38 -0400, Nick Vargish
<nav+posts@bandersnatch.org> wrote:


>PC gaming is still not for the faint-of-heart, and probably never
>really will be.
>
>Nick

Nor is Linux.
Anonymous
September 20, 2005 12:36:38 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.adventure,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.war-historical,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.strategic (More info?)

> He say "...Dual-boot is not an option - this will cost a lot of time
> booting
between OS's and HDD space for installing several OS's. Aside from that
it's too much trouble maintaining two OS's "
@@@

I think Dual-Boot, if you can do it, is certainly your best way...as you
will know you can run any Windows type game without extra troubles....It
would have to be Windows XP as Win 98 would take much less HD space but will
not run most current games...
The Win XP install could take only (perhaps) 2 Gigs + swapfile HD space and
you should have a nice easy-use Boot-start menu ..I have Dual Win 98 & Win
XP which takes no more time to boot into than just one.......maintaining
should be less problems than an single intergrated OS..
Emulator's are a no...(even if they work) the machines speed will be (maybe)
20% of full.

Luv mouse
@@@@@
Anonymous
September 20, 2005 1:02:32 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.adventure,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.war-historical,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.strategic (More info?)

"Chris de Bruin" <news@cdb.demon.nl-nospam> wrote in message
news:11iqm8i3c993id0@corp.supernews.com...
>
>
> There are a few options to solve this "problem". I have read about Wine,
> which works good for most Windows applications, but doesn't seem to do too
> good with gaming.
>

You do that buddy, drink a lot of wine, because you'll need it.
September 20, 2005 1:25:20 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg (More info?)

On 2005-09-19, Quaestor <no-spam@my.place> wrote:
> shadows wrote:
>
>>Loki's issue is that it ported games some six months after the
>>game was released. Sometimes years after. Games rely heavily on
>>marketting. Whether you like it or not it's all the previews,
>>ads, and banners that get us to buy games.
>>
>>
>
> I have never bought a game based on any of that.

If you bought a game based on reviews here it's still a result of
the buzz.
Anonymous
September 20, 2005 1:33:32 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

"Somewhere, over the rainbow... la la la"

QQalextiQQ videotron.few.useless.chars.ca (alexti) wrote:

> Path: newsdbm06.news.prodigy.com!newsdst02.news.prodigy.com!newsmst01b.news.prodigy.com!prodigy.com!newscon06.news.prodigy.com!prodigy.net!border1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!pd7cy2so!shaw.ca!pd7tw1no.POSTED!53ab2750!not-for-mail
> X-Trace-PostClient-IP: 68.147.217.9
> Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.adventure,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.war-historical,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.strategic
> Subject: Re: Gaming on Linux, what are my options?
> From: QQalextiQQ videotron.few.useless.chars.ca (alexti)
> References: <11iqm8i3c993id0 corp.supernews.com> <1127058952.877176.61070 f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com>
> Organization: Your Company
> Message-ID: <Xns96D572123C87CsfjshTTalextiFJFsdsi 24.71.223.159>
> Followup-To: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action
> User-Agent: Xnews/4.05.11
> Lines: 35
> Date: Sun, 18 Sep 2005 17:11:30 GMT
> NNTP-Posting-Host: 24.71.223.147
> X-Complaints-To: abuse shaw.ca
> X-Trace: pd7tw1no 1127063490 24.71.223.147 (Sun, 18 Sep 2005 11:11:30 MDT)
> NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 18 Sep 2005 11:11:30 MDT
> Xref: newsmst01b.news.prodigy.com comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg:733408 comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action:750062 comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.adventure:373755 comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.war-historical:118948 comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.strategic:856622
>
> "magnate" <chrisc dbass.demon.co.uk> wrote in
> news:1127058952.877176.61070 f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com:
>
> <snip>
>>
>> So I think you only have two basic choices here:
>>
>> 1. Resign yourself to playing a subset of games in Linux.
>>
>> or
>>
>> 2. Resign yourself to installing and maintaining a dual-boot system
> Or you can do both: play subset of games in Linux, and when (if) some great
> game comes that works only on Windows, boot in Windows.
>
>> Neither is the end of the world - there are plenty of games for Linux
>> nowadays. A quick glance at my Linux install shows
>>
>> Dominions 2
>> various roguelikes (Angband, Sangband, Oangband, Nethack)
>> Sid Meier's Alpha Centauri & Alien Crossfire
>> StarCraft (almost but not quite running under Wine)
>> DosBox, which runs dozens of older games
>>
>> I'm sure there are loads of more modern games out there which run in
>> Linux - I just don't have them.
> And things are getting better. It seems that there's fewer and fewer good
> games that don't run on Linux. Unfortunately, that's not because more good
> games run on Linux, but because fewer good games seem to come out :( 
>
> But I hope for better, maybe creative indies will embrace Linux (to reduce
> development cost and time if not for anything else) and we will get more
> interesting games.
>
> Alex.
>
Anonymous
September 20, 2005 6:36:27 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg (More info?)

shadows <shadows@whitefang.com> once tried to test me with:

> On 2005-09-19, Quaestor <no-spam@my.place> wrote:
>> shadows wrote:
>>
>>>Loki's issue is that it ported games some six months after the
>>>game was released. Sometimes years after. Games rely heavily on
>>>marketting. Whether you like it or not it's all the previews,
>>>ads, and banners that get us to buy games.
>>>
>>>
>>
>> I have never bought a game based on any of that.
>
> If you bought a game based on reviews here it's still a result of
> the buzz.
>
>

But a lot of the "buzz" doesn't actually cost much to generate. Sending out
review and preview copies to gaming sites - pretty damn cheap. Now, banner
ads, and especially anything on TV is costly, but I am not sure how much of
that is completely necessary.

--

Knight37 - http://knightgames.blogspot.com

Once a Gamer, Always a Gamer.
September 20, 2005 6:36:28 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg (More info?)

On 2005-09-20, Knight37 <knight37m@gmail.com> wrote:

> But a lot of the "buzz" doesn't actually cost much to generate. Sending out
> review and preview copies to gaming sites - pretty damn cheap. Now, banner
> ads, and especially anything on TV is costly, but I am not sure how much of
> that is completely necessary.

The cost isn't the topic of discussion here. When you're eagerly
awaiting HOMM 3 and Alpha Centauri you're not going to wait an
additional six months or a year for Loki to port it to
Linux. You're just going to go out and buy the Windows version
and be done.

Loki failed because by the time they released a port the game
became old and all the gaming websites had ads and reviews up for
new games. In all likelyhood HOMM 3 wasn't the big topic of
discussion here by the time Loki released its port; other games
were being discussed.

The poster I replied to thinks he's some iron willed warrior who
is completely unaffected by "marketting." This isn't true as is
evidenced by his participation in this forum which is, in a large
part, a by product of games being marketted.
Anonymous
September 20, 2005 10:13:54 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.adventure,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.war-historical,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.strategic (More info?)

Arjuna wrote:
> Our Highway to the Reich ( HTTR ) WW2 op wargame runs under Linux using
> Cedega. CHeck out this forum post:
>
> http://www.matrixgames.com/default.asp?URL=http%3A//www...
>

So? The OP was asking for a general solution, which Cedega doesn't
offer. If he was asking for a "60% of games sort of work" solution, then
Cedega would be perfect. The trouble is that you can't be sure that the
games you'll want to play six months from now will work on Cedega.
Anonymous
September 20, 2005 11:57:55 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.adventure,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.war-historical,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.strategic (More info?)

Kevin <no@SPAM.here> writes:

> >PC gaming is still not for the faint-of-heart, and probably never
> >really will be.

> Nor is Linux.

Well, that was kind of my point, since the OP described himself as
"lazy", it seemed like a console or two would be the best thing for
him.

Nick

--
#include<stdio.h> /* sigmask (sig.c) 20041028 PUBLIC DOMAIN */
int main(c,v)char *v;{return !c?putchar(* /* cc -o sig sig.c */
v-1)&&main(0,v+1):main(0,"Ojdl!Wbshjti!=ojdlAwbshjti/psh?\v\1");}
Anonymous
September 20, 2005 11:08:11 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.adventure,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.war-historical,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.strategic (More info?)

On 20-9-2005 13:57, Nick Vargish wrote:
> Kevin <no@SPAM.here> writes:
>
>
>>>PC gaming is still not for the faint-of-heart, and probably never
>>>really will be.
>
>
>>Nor is Linux.
>
>
> Well, that was kind of my point, since the OP described himself as
> "lazy", it seemed like a console or two would be the best thing for
> him.
>
> Nick
>
The "me being lazy" part was figurative. What I meant is that I
personally think it's too much trouble to have to boot from one OS to
another every time I want to use a specific application. It shouldn't be
necessary.

Than why not just stick with Windows you say? It's more a thing for the
future. Technology ages as does software like Windows. I have been
reading about the new Windows Vista and the abnormal amount of RAM,
VRAM en CPU it needs to run properly. All because of some nice graphic
features I probably don't even want to use.

Linux offers more than this. There are regular distributions released
and they also run on slower machines. Recap - you don't need to upgrade
your machine in order to be able to run Linux.

Off course Windows XP will run fine for a few more years, but at a
certain point it will be obsolete and there won't be much software
released and support for the OS. E.g. Windows 2000 was released in 1999
and ran for about 6 years when MS pulled the support-plug. Windows XP
was released in 2001 if I follow the Windows 2000 time line, the
support-plug will be pulled in about 2 years.

Just looking around what the options are - and Linux happens to be one
of them.

- And yes - I also own a Xbox :)  -

--
Bow before me, for I am root.
Anonymous
September 20, 2005 11:08:12 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.adventure,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.war-historical,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.strategic (More info?)

In article <11j0gfoc300phaf@corp.supernews.com>, news@cdb.demon.nl-
nospam says...

> Than why not just stick with Windows you say? It's more a thing for the
> future. Technology ages as does software like Windows. I have been
> reading about the new Windows Vista and the abnormal amount of RAM,
> VRAM en CPU it needs to run properly. All because of some nice graphic
> features I probably don't even want to use.

What you have to ask yourself, though, is how much that "abnormal"
hardware requirement is going to cost to upgrade to when Vista actually
appears next year ... or the year after that ... or the year after that.

Speaking for myself, I'd much rather shell out the $200 to pick up a
low-end 2007 mobo and CPU than change operating systems now.

> Linux offers more than this. There are regular distributions released
> and they also run on slower machines. Recap - you don't need to upgrade
> your machine in order to be able to run Linux.

Sure you do. Toss a copy of some RAM-hungry 2005 disto onto a machine
that ran Linux great back in 2000, and watch it craaaaaaaaaaawl.

--
Giftzwerg
***
"The media's breathless tabulation of casualties in Iraq - now, over
1,800 deaths - is generally devoid of context. Here's some context:
between 1983 and 1996, 18,006 American military personnel died
accidentally in the service of their country. That death rate of 1,286
per year exceeds the rate of combat deaths in Iraq by a ratio of nearly
two to one."
- John Hinderaker
Anonymous
September 21, 2005 8:00:54 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.adventure,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.war-historical,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.strategic (More info?)

Chris de Bruin <news@cdb.demon.nl-nospam> wrote in
news:11j0gfoc300phaf@corp.supernews.com:

> On 20-9-2005 13:57, Nick Vargish wrote:
>> Kevin <no@SPAM.here> writes:
>>
>>
>>>>PC gaming is still not for the faint-of-heart, and probably never
>>>>really will be.
>>
>>
>>>Nor is Linux.
>>
>>
>> Well, that was kind of my point, since the OP described himself as
>> "lazy", it seemed like a console or two would be the best thing for
>> him.
>>
>> Nick
>>
> The "me being lazy" part was figurative. What I meant is that I
> personally think it's too much trouble to have to boot from one OS to
> another every time I want to use a specific application. It shouldn't be
> necessary.
Not much you can do about it. Those OSes are too different and many
applications exist only on one of them :( 

The best you can do (IMHO) is to make dual boot, but make shared filesystem
(probably FAT32) and put your email, newsgroups, web etc there. This way
you can do these activities from either boot which will allow you to avoid
unnecessary reboots. But, of course, if you want to switch between gaming
and development, tough luck. If you have 2 computers you can do many things
on Linux box via running terminal on Windows. But if you want to run
something graphics intensive from Linux box, it's becoming suboptimal...

Alex.
Anonymous
September 21, 2005 8:39:32 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.adventure,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.war-historical,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.strategic (More info?)

"ROBERT POLLARD" <RobertAPollard@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote in
news:uvBXe.868$MD4.771@fe1.news.blueyonder.co.uk:

> No, but seriously, unless you have a real reason to use Linux (and
> gaming isn't one of them), don't do it!
<snip>
>
> 'Do I actually NEED linux? What will I actually USE it for?'
That's actually a very good question to ask. Surprising enough many Windows
shortcoming can be overcome without switching OS. One of the main ones is
lack of tools and utilities. Installing cygwin will fix large part of this
one. You will get good shell, decent make system, text batch processing,
few scripting languages and a lot of other stuff. This will take care of
most of repetitive work one has to do on Windows. Many traditionally UNIX
packages have Windows ports as well (the drawback is that you'll have to
hunt them down and install on your own, but if you're used to Windows there
is nothing new in that).

For someone new to Linux, I'd suggest to start this way; it will allow you
to learn a lot about Linux and its tools without totally diving into it.
Later, when you decide to switch to real Linux you'll have much easier
time.

So why one would want to switch to Linux? I suspect that for average user
there's no good reason. The most of Linux strong points is related to doing
something serious, not to the entertainment which is probably the main
computer use for the average user. Linux will give you a bit better
stability, but rebooting Windows once a week is not really that big hassle.
Security-wise advantage is probably not that important for most people. So
even if they get trojan or virus, it's not that big deal.

For more creative people, there're more incentives: version control system
would benefit most, always nice to keep history of your work and much
easier to collaborate. For those in interested in programming Lunux offers
a lot of nice tools. Everybody with technical interests is likely to find
some interesting offering on Linux - because his interests are likely to
coincide with interests of some of developers :)  Finally, it's nicer to be
a driver than a passenger (even if one doesn't know where he is going) :) 

Alex.
Anonymous
September 21, 2005 3:30:41 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.adventure,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.war-historical,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.strategic (More info?)

Chris de Bruin <news@cdb.demon.nl-nospam> wrote in news:11iqm8i3c993id0
@corp.supernews.com:

> I am preparing to migrate from Windows to Linux. Off course I still need
> to be able to do the things with Linux that I now do with Windows. Main
> issue today: gaming, what are my options?
>

Some of my favorite games have linux options. Such as Dominions 2

But generally I prefer linux as a server option rather than a desktop
option

Gandalf Parker
Anonymous
September 21, 2005 5:15:23 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.adventure,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.war-historical,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.strategic (More info?)

In article <1127237223.530606.153020@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com>,
"Knight37" <knight37m@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>Chris de Bruin wrote:
>> The "me being lazy" part was figurative.
>
>Sure it was, you lazy git. I bet you're too lazy to clicky clicky the
>little icons too. ;P
>
>> What I meant is that I
>> personally think it's too much trouble to have to boot from one OS to
>> another every time I want to use a specific application. It shouldn't be
>> necessary.
>
>It SHOULDN'T be, but it IS. The compatibility to run Windows software,
>particularly games, under Linux just isn't there yet
I thought there was. Run a windows emulator as a job under Unix.
I thought there was one already.
<snip>

/BAH
Anonymous
September 21, 2005 6:43:07 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.adventure,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.war-historical,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.strategic (More info?)

In article <1127316988.795729.148310@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com>,
"knight37" <knight37m@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>jmfbahciv@aol.com wrote:
>> In article <1127237223.530606.153020@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com>,
>> "Knight37" <knight37m@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >
>> >Chris de Bruin wrote:
>> >> The "me being lazy" part was figurative.
>> >
>> >Sure it was, you lazy git. I bet you're too lazy to clicky clicky the
>> >little icons too. ;P
>> >
>> >> What I meant is that I
>> >> personally think it's too much trouble to have to boot from one OS to
>> >> another every time I want to use a specific application. It shouldn't be
>> >> necessary.
>> >
>> >It SHOULDN'T be, but it IS. The compatibility to run Windows software,
>> >particularly games, under Linux just isn't there yet
>> I thought there was. Run a windows emulator as a job under Unix.
>> I thought there was one already.
>
>They don't work for every game, only a few.

An emulator makes the Windows program think it's running
on the real hardware. I don't think you understood
what I meant.

/BAH
Anonymous
September 21, 2005 9:14:37 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

On Wed, 21 Sep 2005 04:39:32 GMT, alexti wrote:

> So why one would want to switch to Linux? I suspect that for average user
> there's no good reason.

There are some reasons that fall in the "ideology" category. Windows is not
free, not as in "beer" and not as in "speech". New versions always cost
money, and frequently, you *must* get those if you want to keep using new
software. I realise that most people either use the OEM version they got
with a new computer or use a pirated copy, but still. With DRM, "Trusted
Computing" and other such nonsense on the Windows horizon, there are also
some solid reasons to switch to Linux, FreeBSD or OSX for those users who
feel strongly about privacy and "freedom".

On a practical level, you cannot really choose a GUI of your preference
under Windows. You have to use what Microsoft gives you.

M.
Anonymous
September 22, 2005 4:44:45 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

Michael Vondung <mvondung@gmail.com> wrote in
news:3t4s3ugwk5uk$.1638jvwfka6w4$.dlg@40tude.net:

> On Wed, 21 Sep 2005 04:39:32 GMT, alexti wrote:
>
>> So why one would want to switch to Linux? I suspect that for average
>> user there's no good reason.
>
> There are some reasons that fall in the "ideology" category. Windows is
> not free, not as in "beer" and not as in "speech". New versions always
> cost money, and frequently, you *must* get those if you want to keep
> using new software. I realise that most people either use the OEM
> version they got with a new computer or use a pirated copy, but still.
> With DRM, "Trusted Computing" and other such nonsense on the Windows
> horizon, there are also some solid reasons to switch to Linux, FreeBSD
> or OSX for those users who feel strongly about privacy and "freedom".
>
> On a practical level, you cannot really choose a GUI of your preference
> under Windows. You have to use what Microsoft gives you.

You're right about that. But I am not sure if "average user" is aware of
those issues. Anyway, who is that "average user"? Everybody probably thinks
he is the greatest computer expert after Bill Gates :) 

Alex.
Anonymous
September 22, 2005 2:34:49 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.adventure,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.war-historical,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.strategic (More info?)

"magnate" <chrisc@dbass.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>The first part is total, complete and utter bollocks - unless by
>"competently-managed" you mean "with Explorer replaced by Firefox". I
>run a fully updated XP system and still find and remove viruses and
>trojans on a regular basis

I wonder why? I've always run Windows XP and IE without an anti-virus
program (except for the anti-virus scan that's required before logging
onto corpnet from outside, and a few anti-spyware runs out of
curiosity). The same on my family PC. Have NEVER ONCE had a virus or
trojan or spyware. And I do browse to "fun" websites (filez, mp3z,
....). All this makes me think that a competently-managed Windows
machine is possible, and I've got one, and you don't.

--
Lucian
Anonymous
September 22, 2005 5:18:44 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.adventure,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.war-historical,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.strategic (More info?)

In article <1127325536.446520.53520@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com>,
"knight37" <knight37m@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>jmfbah...@aol.com wrote:
>> In article <1127316988.795729.148310@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com>,
>> "knight37" <knight37m@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >
>> >jmfbahciv@aol.com wrote:
>> >> In article <1127237223.530606.153020@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com>,
>> >> "Knight37" <knight37m@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >> >
>> >> >Chris de Bruin wrote:
>> >> >> The "me being lazy" part was figurative.
>> >> >
>> >> >Sure it was, you lazy git. I bet you're too lazy to clicky clicky the
>> >> >little icons too. ;P
>> >> >
>> >> >> What I meant is that I
>> >> >> personally think it's too much trouble to have to boot from one OS to
>> >> >> another every time I want to use a specific application. It shouldn't
be
>> >> >> necessary.
>> >> >
>> >> >It SHOULDN'T be, but it IS. The compatibility to run Windows software,
>> >> >particularly games, under Linux just isn't there yet
>> >> I thought there was. Run a windows emulator as a job under Unix.
>> >> I thought there was one already.
>> >
>> >They don't work for every game, only a few.
>>
>> An emulator makes the Windows program think it's running
>> on the real hardware. I don't think you understood
>> what I meant.
>
>I do understand what you meant.

Oh, OK. I had to check. Sorry.

> .. Can you give a specific emulator that
>you're talking about?

No, I can't remember the cybercrud.

> ...Because every one I've read about for linux
>doesn't work for every game out there. If you know of one otherwise I'm
>sure the original poster would be interested in hearing about it.

If I see the magic incantation, I'll post it here...in c.s.i.p.g.r.
Note that I, also, am repeated gossip that I've read.

> .. Even
>VMWare, which is reputedly the best of the virtual-machine programs
>(and priced accordingly, it's pretty expensive) won't work for every
>windows game.

From what you've written, I'm getting the impression that
you've read about failures. If so, then you can't give
a detail about one; or can you? I'd like to know.
Just at a guestimate, I'd say that the problem lay in
the memory mismanagement of Windows but that's just
an educated guess.

It is certain that people I've seen talk about this
have not tested every game written for Windows.



/BAH
Anonymous
September 22, 2005 10:33:24 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.adventure,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.war-historical,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.strategic (More info?)

After reading some stuff on the register (IT news site that is generally
anti MS) over the last day or two, it turns out that firefox in it's present
state has some major security issues and IE seems to have been sorted
out.....

I have to say I agree with magnate, I have had XP since it has come out and
the only security software I use is a firewall. Never had any virus's or
trojans. Some of my friends machines that I had to sort out were in a poor
way because they either didn't have a running fire wall or they hadn't used
MS update. Stability on my XP system seems extremely solid. In fact I think
XP is so good Microsoft might have trouble getting people to upgrade....

On the linux side I have had numerous crashes, mostly from the desktop (KDE)
I might add. I think the problem with linux is that you have a very good
command line OS which has stacked on top of it a bunch of API's and layers
that don't seem to entirely fit togoether properly and produce a desktop
system that is greater than the sum of its parts. I can do things on the
linux command line, that will not be seen in the desktop, because the two
aren't working effectivelly together. XP is much better at command
line/desktop integration, not quite as good as OS/2 with its object based
desktop, but still pretty good never the less.

Ironically, the main problem with linux for me is not the OS, but the lack
of good quality productivity software for it. All the distros I tried come
bundled with 1000's of applications, most of which are way below par in the
functionality department, and hey, if you don't want to pay for software on
XP dowload the Eclipse Java IDE for free and a whole host of other free gold
nuggets that can be found around the internet.

Linux'ers have most Xp'ers figured wrong. We are fairly neutral people that
just want to 'use' our computers. Some of us would love to have a different
vendor for their OS, but don't feel that Linux supplies the necesary
software. Who knows, now that the Macs are going intel, I wonder if apple
would ever be tempted to sell their OS to the desktop PC market and give
microsoft a fright.....

RobP


"Lucian Wischik" <lu.nn@wischik.com> wrote in message
news:qhq5j1tll60m0910hm4hg4knkprq9bhb5l@4ax.com...
> "magnate" <chrisc@dbass.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>>The first part is total, complete and utter bollocks - unless by
>>"competently-managed" you mean "with Explorer replaced by Firefox". I
>>run a fully updated XP system and still find and remove viruses and
>>trojans on a regular basis
>
> I wonder why? I've always run Windows XP and IE without an anti-virus
> program (except for the anti-virus scan that's required before logging
> onto corpnet from outside, and a few anti-spyware runs out of
> curiosity). The same on my family PC. Have NEVER ONCE had a virus or
> trojan or spyware. And I do browse to "fun" websites (filez, mp3z,
> ...). All this makes me think that a competently-managed Windows
> machine is possible, and I've got one, and you don't.
>
> --
> Lucian
>
September 23, 2005 12:00:20 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.adventure,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.war-historical,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.strategic (More info?)

On Thu, 22 Sep 2005 18:33:24 GMT, "ROBERT POLLARD"
<RobertAPollard@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:

>After reading some stuff on the register (IT news site that is generally
>anti MS) over the last day or two, it turns out that firefox in it's present
>state has some major security issues

There is already a patch for the issue.

> and IE seems to have been sorted
>out.....

ROFL.
--
Andrew, contact via interpleb.blogspot.com
Help make Usenet a better place: English is read downwards,
please don't top post. Trim replies to quote only relevant text.
Check groups.google.com before asking an obvious question.
Anonymous
September 23, 2005 5:18:09 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.adventure,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.war-historical,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.strategic (More info?)

"magnate" <chrisc@dbass.demon.co.uk> wrote in
news:1127399985.175720.161060@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com:

> Giftzwerg wrote:
>> In short, a properly-updated, competently-managed XP system isn't
>> vulnerable *at all* - and it's easier for a naive user to update and
>> manage an XP box. How can you claim a better record for Linux?
>
> The first part is total, complete and utter bollocks - unless by
> "competently-managed" you mean "with Explorer replaced by Firefox". I
> run a fully updated XP system and still find and remove viruses and
> trojans on a regular basis (though less often since switching to
> Firefox). These are *not* caught by the M$ "malicious software removal
> tool".
>
> Even the second point is arguable - Debian-based distros such as Ubuntu
> are now extremely easy to update and manage, and many other package
> management systems are nearly as good.
"nearly as good"? I'd say that Debian's one is by far better than Windows
update system. Why? Because on Windows only OS and office (and occasionally
some other MS products) are getting updated. All other applications the
user has to update on his own. Some of applications may have their own
auto-update feature, but sooner or later one of them screws up something in
registry or in system32 with *usual* consequences (unless one backs up
windows before every update of every application - which is wise, but
frustratingly time consuming). On Debian pretty much everything gets
updated when necessary (including things like library dependency
resolution).

Alex.
Anonymous
September 23, 2005 5:27:39 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.adventure,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.war-historical,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.strategic (More info?)

"ROBERT POLLARD" <RobertAPollard@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote in
news:UNCYe.9963$MD4.8080@fe1.news.blueyonder.co.uk:

> Ironically, the main problem with linux for me is not the OS, but the
> lack of good quality productivity software for it. All the distros I
> tried come bundled with 1000's of applications, most of which are way
> below par in the functionality department, and hey, if you don't want
> to pay for software on XP dowload the Eclipse Java IDE for free and a
> whole host of other free gold nuggets that can be found around the
> internet.
Have you actually tried to run Eclipse on XP? It's so sluggish.
Unfortunately, that's not uncommon. One of the reasons is that cost of the
process on XP is very high in comparison to UNIX. As a result you have to
compromise between speed and stability. For example, if you need to run
some external plugin on UNIX you'd fork and run that plugin in forked
process (with decreased privileges for a good measure), so that if it has
bugs it won't thrash your program and won't do much damage. On XP you have
to either start another process (which is slow and non-trivial to bring it
to the right state) or run plugin within your process, which means that
problems in plugin are likely to bring problems in your app as well.

Alex.
September 23, 2005 12:56:21 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.adventure,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.war-historical,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.strategic (More info?)

On Fri, 23 Sep 2005 00:37:48 GMT, Epi Watkins <epicat1212@hotmail.com>
wrote:

>I run XP. I rarely get viruses. I don't count attachments that I never
>open. I have problems with Firefox too. Most 3rd-party browsers will
>do anything Firefox will. I use Avant which is based on IE. It seems
>to me that you just like anything that is alternative.

Maybe one or two will do what Firefox does by default, name one that
has the hundreds of extensions that Firefox has.
--
Andrew, contact via interpleb.blogspot.com
Help make Usenet a better place: English is read downwards,
please don't top post. Trim replies to quote only relevant text.
Check groups.google.com before asking an obvious question.
Anonymous
September 23, 2005 1:01:37 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.adventure,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.war-historical,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.strategic (More info?)

In article <v5d7j19fe7nmf9rv4bqcbcu02nqau4t391@4ax.com>,
spamtrap@localhost. says...
> On Fri, 23 Sep 2005 00:37:48 GMT, Epi Watkins <epicat1212@hotmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> >I run XP. I rarely get viruses. I don't count attachments that I never
> >open. I have problems with Firefox too. Most 3rd-party browsers will
> >do anything Firefox will. I use Avant which is based on IE. It seems
> >to me that you just like anything that is alternative.
>
> Maybe one or two will do what Firefox does by default, name one that
> has the hundreds of extensions that Firefox has.

unless I'm going something wrong, Firefox has a problem saving pics (no,
not just porn). Instead of saving what's downloaded and displaying, it
downloads it again. It's also butt ugly. Though maybe you can find a
decent skin.

The browser I use does all I would want it to. As long as you can
search with google with it, I'm fairly satisfied. You can also turn
java and activex off and on real easy with it. Other things too, but
I'm too lazy to look.

Epi

----
When you use insults as a crutch, it's much like
using cussing in the same manner. It's not a great
sign of intelligence.
----
Some people can think for themselves. Others read
books and "parrot" them.
----
When he was growing up, his mother never allowed him
to admit he was wrong. If he did, he got a horrible
whipping.
----
http://www.curlesneck.com
September 23, 2005 2:06:37 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.adventure,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.war-historical,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.strategic (More info?)

On Fri, 23 Sep 2005 09:01:37 GMT, Epi Watkins <epicat1212@hotmail.com>
wrote:

>The browser I use does all I would want it to. As long as you can
>search with google with it, I'm fairly satisfied. You can also turn
>java and activex off and on real easy with it. Other things too, but
>I'm too lazy to look.

If that is all you use it for then you aren't really qualified to make
comparisons of different browsers. There are hundreds of extensions,
several of which are invaluable for me - Adblock in particular, that
make Firefox the clear leader IMO.
--
Andrew, contact via interpleb.blogspot.com
Help make Usenet a better place: English is read downwards,
please don't top post. Trim replies to quote only relevant text.
Check groups.google.com before asking an obvious question.
Anonymous
September 23, 2005 2:06:38 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.adventure,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.war-historical,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.strategic (More info?)

In article <o7h7j19dfve1oie2ksi7hgakbp5nd04hju@4ax.com>,
spamtrap@localhost. says...
> On Fri, 23 Sep 2005 09:01:37 GMT, Epi Watkins <epicat1212@hotmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> >The browser I use does all I would want it to. As long as you can
> >search with google with it, I'm fairly satisfied. You can also turn
> >java and activex off and on real easy with it. Other things too, but
> >I'm too lazy to look.
>
> If that is all you use it for then you aren't really qualified to make
> comparisons of different browsers. There are hundreds of extensions,
> several of which are invaluable for me - Adblock in particular, that
> make Firefox the clear leader IMO.

How about this...Ever do web pages? If it works, it will work in IE.
Might not in other browsers. This includes Firefox. The only time a
page won't work for IE is when someone included a script so it won't.
If you ever do web pages, browsers other than IE can be a pain.

Epi

----
When you use insults as a crutch, it's much like
using cussing in the same manner. It's not a great
sign of intelligence.
----
Some people can think for themselves. Others read
books and "parrot" them.
----
When he was growing up, his mother never allowed him
to admit he was wrong. If he did, he got a horrible
whipping.
----
http://www.curlesneck.com
Anonymous
September 23, 2005 2:06:39 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.adventure,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.war-historical,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.strategic (More info?)

Epi Watkins <epicat1212@hotmail.com> writes:

> If you ever do web pages, browsers other than IE can be a pain.

I think you have that backwards, Epi.

Nick

--
#include<stdio.h> /* sigmask (sig.c) 20041028 PUBLIC DOMAIN */
int main(c,v)char *v;{return !c?putchar(* /* cc -o sig sig.c */
v-1)&&main(0,v+1):main(0,"Ojdl!Wbshjti!=ojdlAwbshjti/psh?\v\1");}
Anonymous
September 23, 2005 3:45:16 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.adventure,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.war-historical,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.strategic (More info?)

On Fri, 23 Sep 2005 07:36:13 -0700, wolfing wrote:

> Try running today's Linux in a Pentium I
> with 64MB RAM and a 2GB Hard drive.

Actually you can - as long as you don't use a big resource-intensive GUI
like KDE3 or Gnome. Linux with a very simple GUI like Icewm or Blackbox
(or no GUI) will work on an older computer.


> If you want to play games in your computer, there is no option. Win XP
> is the only choice.

Win 2000 still works, since it uses the same video and sound card drivers
as XP. I don't know of any games that are XP only (yet).
Anonymous
September 23, 2005 4:10:13 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.adventure,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.war-historical,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.strategic (More info?)

In article <87y85oat97.fsf@localhost.localdomain>,
nav+posts@bandersnatch.org says...
> Epi Watkins <epicat1212@hotmail.com> writes:
>
> > If you ever do web pages, browsers other than IE can be a pain.
>
> I think you have that backwards, Epi.
>
> Nick

How so....Everything works on IE. Not on other browsers. You have to
install Java separately now, of course.

Oh! I forgot. The big bad bear makes IE.

Epi

----
When you use insults as a crutch, it's much like
using cussing in the same manner. It's not a great
sign of intelligence.
----
Some people can think for themselves. Others read
books and "parrot" them.
----
When he was growing up, his mother never allowed him
to admit he was wrong. If he did, he got a horrible
whipping.
----
http://www.curlesneck.com
Anonymous
September 23, 2005 4:10:14 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.adventure,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.war-historical,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.strategic (More info?)

Epi Watkins <epicat1212@hotmail.com> writes:

> How so....Everything works on IE. Not on other browsers.

Try writing a web site using CSS2 before you make such claims.

> You have to install Java separately now, of course.

Java's an entirely seperate issue.

> Oh! I forgot. The big bad bear makes IE.

BFD. I could care less who makes it, what bothers me is that it
isn't compliant with published standards.

Nick

--
#include<stdio.h> /* sigmask (sig.c) 20041028 PUBLIC DOMAIN */
int main(c,v)char *v;{return !c?putchar(* /* cc -o sig sig.c */
v-1)&&main(0,v+1):main(0,"Ojdl!Wbshjti!=ojdlAwbshjti/psh?\v\1");}
Anonymous
September 24, 2005 4:59:16 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.adventure,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.war-historical,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.strategic (More info?)

Andrew <spamtrap@localhost.> wrote:
>If that is all you use it for then you aren't really qualified to make
>comparisons of different browsers. There are hundreds of extensions,
>several of which are invaluable for me - Adblock in particular, that
>make Firefox the clear leader IMO.

.... or download The Proxomitron, and get cross-browser ad-blocking. (I
also configured it to enlarge fonts on certain too-small websites.)

--
Lucian
Anonymous
September 24, 2005 6:31:20 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.adventure,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.war-historical,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.strategic (More info?)

On Fri, 23 Sep 2005 10:06:37 +0100, Andrew wrote:

> On Fri, 23 Sep 2005 09:01:37 GMT, Epi Watkins <epicat1212@hotmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>>The browser I use does all I would want it to. As long as you can
>>search with google with it, I'm fairly satisfied. You can also turn
>>java and activex off and on real easy with it. Other things too, but
>>I'm too lazy to look.
>
> If that is all you use it for then you aren't really qualified to make
> comparisons of different browsers. There are hundreds of extensions,
> several of which are invaluable for me - Adblock in particular, that
> make Firefox the clear leader IMO.

Adblock is a great tool, but it's not the first ad blocking software.

Now if only it would integrate a cookie blocker into it as well!
September 24, 2005 6:31:21 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.adventure,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.war-historical,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.strategic (More info?)

>>>The browser I use does all I would want it to. As long as you can
>>>search with google with it, I'm fairly satisfied. You can also turn
>>>java and activex off and on real easy with it. Other things too, but
>>>I'm too lazy to look.
>>
>> If that is all you use it for then you aren't really qualified to make
>> comparisons of different browsers. There are hundreds of extensions,
>> several of which are invaluable for me - Adblock in particular, that
>> make Firefox the clear leader IMO.
>
> Adblock is a great tool, but it's not the first ad blocking software.
>
> Now if only it would integrate a cookie blocker into it as well!

What are you talking about? Firefox already has the option to
block/allow cookies, or to only accept cookies from the site you're on,
or to exclude cookies on a per-site basis, and even to clear the cookies
when you exit Firefox. And, unusually, it's all in the options screen,
so you don't even have to look at about:config.

HTH.

CK
Anonymous
September 24, 2005 6:31:22 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.adventure,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.war-historical,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.strategic (More info?)

On Sat, 24 Sep 2005 01:35:45 GMT the fame writer, CK wrote not much to
be useful on, "Re: Firefox extensions",

>What are you talking about?

He spam this all over!

Please don't feed the Trolls.
--
DISCLAIMER
If you find a posting or message from myself
offensive, inappropriate, or disruptive, please
ignore it. If you don't know how to ignore a posting,
complain to me and I will demonstrate.
!