Re: Ubuntu to kill desktops....
Posted: Mon Mar 05, 2012 8:40 pm
Heh.. I have Orion. Fun to play with but like many things, I suck at using it 

http://www.purebasic.com
https://www.purebasic.fr/english/
That's where the most money is to be made. More users = more potential money. Plus have you seen the price customers pay for Apple stuff?Danilo wrote:There must be a reason why many companies write great software for Windows and MacOS but simply ignore Linux.
I tried installing PureBasic on Ubuntu, it was quite long compared to a normal Windows/Mac install.MachineCode wrote: I reckon it's because of what I posted above. It's not an OS for everyday people. It's written by geeks, for geeks. I can't even play an MP3 without downloading additional codecs? Sorry, I don't have the time nor the motivation to learn that sort of rubbish.
And just look at all the support in these forums for getting PureBasic to run on Linux. Things like http://www.purebasic.fr/english/viewtop ... 15&t=49018 and http://www.purebasic.fr/english/viewtop ... 15&t=47545 scare me off even trying to use PureBasic under Linux! And look at "help" like this:
What the? Means nothing to me. With Windows, I just run Setup.exe for PureBasic and it works. Too easy.Shardik wrote:Solution:Code: Select all
sudo apt-get install libxxf86vm-dev
MP3 is a patented format and requires some hefty licensing fees. Even those of us developing games with PB have to pay a licensing fee if we want to distribute MP3s with our game no matter what OS we target.MachineCode wrote:I can't even play an MP3 without downloading additional codecs?
You made a misstatement in one of those threads. PureBasic does not create standalone EXEs on Windows. EXEs you create with PB require the VC++ runtime and other "runtimes" which are common to all Windows programs. Usually, these will already be installed on Windows. The most you should have to update is the VC++ runtime.MachineCode wrote:And just look at all the support in these forums for getting PureBasic to run on Linux. Things like viewtopic.php?f=15&t=49018 and viewtopic.php?f=15&t=47545 scare me off even trying to use PureBasic under Linux! And look at "help" like this...
You would also have to likely download updates to .NET, and perhaps the VC++ runtime. If it is a game, you may have to update DirectX.the.weavster wrote:If I want to install 5 applications on Windows I'd probably have to go to 5 different websites, download 5 different installers and then run them one after the other.
Don't forget how easy installing Linux is. Stick the CD/DVD in, boot from the drive, click on a few prompts and it installs and when it installs everything works and your computer is ready to use.the.weavster wrote:With Ubuntu I'd open Synaptic, tick 5 check boxes and click 'Apply' (this is also all you need to do to install codecs).
Any missing dependencies, including GUI libraries, are installed for me.
How is Windows easier?
I agree, Windows is superior for audio production. Where else can you find the manufacturer of an OS that will intentionally break the majority of audio software and audio hardware by the changes they made to DirectSound and DirectMusic when they introduced Vista. Although the software eventually caught up, many of us with thousands of dollars invested in audio hardware are stuck using XP (which is NOT a bad thing).Danilo wrote:Just check the audio software and seriously compare it with something like Reason and Ableton Live.
It makes me laughing, but I am just a dumb-ass anyway.
Therefore, Linux is like a box of chocolates: you never know what you're going to get. Such confusion over which version to use, just to play your music, isn't a good sign. And it's not just MP3s either: Ubuntu v10.10 doesn't play MPG or AVI videos that I threw at it, either. It's all too much hassle, and if I think that way when testing it... then how many other newbies think the same? That image of Windows vs Linux installs is spot-on, too. Good one!Kuron wrote:That said, many Linux distros have a version that includes the MP3 codecs.
Define "modern", because Win XP comes with DX9 installed.Kuron wrote:DirectX 9 is now the default for the sprite commands and DirectX 9 is not installed by default on any modern version of Windows.
Most distros I've tried come with Python already installed and there's an abundance of add on modules for it in the repositories too. PyGTK is Canonical's recommended way of developing for the Ubuntu app store. As Cython matures this way of developing is going to get even better.naw wrote:I think it is also more difficult developing for Linux, especially when you don't have 8Hrs /day and the security of income to support it.
Some distros (e.g Mint, PCLinuxOS, CrunchBang) come with the codecs already installed.naw wrote:The reason why is simple - truth is Ubuntu could have included those codecs and absorbed the cost and the complexity themselves, but they shifted the complexity towards the user and that is the way (and the fault) with Linux.
This is the best way to screw up a Windows install. The drivers MS distributes often do not properly support the hardware, or are grossly outdated.Thorium wrote:Also drivers can just be installed using windows update without the need to actualy
know what hardware is build in.
Container formats often use compression technology that is patented and requires licensing.MachineCode wrote:Ubuntu v10.10 doesn't play MPG or AVI videos that I threw at it, either.
No, it doesn't. It comes with DirectX 8.1 installed. XP was released on October 2001. DirectX 9 was not released until December 2002. XP is not modern by any stretch of the imagination.MachineCode wrote:Define "modern", because Win XP comes with DX9 installed.
Sorry mate but my experience is quite the opposite.Kuron wrote: The drivers MS distributes often do not properly support the hardware, or are grossly outdated.
I said "often", not "always".fsw wrote:Sorry mate but my experience is quite the opposite.Kuron wrote: The drivers MS distributes often do not properly support the hardware, or are grossly outdated.
Kuron wrote:This is the best way to screw up a Windows install. The drivers MS distributes often do not properly support the hardware, or are grossly outdated.
Not even 'often', all the PCs I've reinstalled Windows 7 on with different hardware have never had a problem with the provided drivers. The only thing they lacked were minor functionality or settings but basically worked.Kuron wrote:I said "often", not "always".I have had a similar experience with a printer that is even older than yours.
And from the picture in your previous post that you labelled 'really relevant' it's obvious you haven't installed anything on Linux since Adam was a lad.moogle wrote:From your experience of windows and it 'needing to install drivers for every piece of hardware' I'm thinking maybe you haven't installed windows in quite some time, as it's never been that way for quite a while.
Well..the.weavster wrote:And from the picture in your previous post that you labelled 'really relevant' it's obvious you haven't installed anything on Linux since Adam was a lad.moogle wrote:From your experience of windows and it 'needing to install drivers for every piece of hardware' I'm thinking maybe you haven't installed windows in quite some time, as it's never been that way for quite a while.