Why?

Página 2/3
1 | | 3

Por wolf_

Ambassador_ (9747)

Imagen del wolf_

04-07-2016, 10:33

Yea well, Linux is Unix'ish.

Por NYYRIKKI

Enlighted (5272)

Imagen del NYYRIKKI

04-07-2016, 12:03

wolf_ wrote:

I thought Linux had a visual interface with 3d blocks, so simple even a kid could operate it! Wink

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dFUlAQZB9Ng

Indeed... As Poltergeist pointed out in the movie FSN (aka Fusion) is running on IRIX, but later there was made OpenGL version called FSV that you can run on Linux as well.

Por Wild_Penguin

Hero (531)

Imagen del Wild_Penguin

04-07-2016, 13:17

tfh wrote:

It's always funny to see how "Linux people" say: "Just compile it yourself it's easy..."
And still they wonder why the avarge user prefers Windows over Linux...

I never said that (if you were referring to me - but neiher can I see anyone saying that).

The user has the choice: use Windows, OS X or a Linux distribution of your choice - whichever suites you needs. I can see different people making different choices, and really I don't see any problem here. For Windows there are currently two days old snapshots available at the site linked previously. If you want to live on the bleeding edge on a Linux distribution or OS X, you just need to put a little bit of your own effort into it (compiling is not actually rocket science).

However, I can see some point in your critisism. I guess this boils down into this: Linux is not windows. Linux is something else. Some of the difficulties (like installing dependencies for software outside the package system) stem from the fact that there is no centralized control: this leads into dozens of distributions, and dozens of libraries, and software that can be picky about libraries and their versions. Compiling - while still quite easy - is not a trivial task (though I must mention OpenMSX is not one of the difficult ones in this regard, and is relatively easy to compile compared to some other beasts out there). But there are reasons why "Linux people" still choose to use Linux. The variety and lack of central control is a double-edged sword. I'm not going in to details here, since this is a bit off-topic as it is...

Por Marq

Champion (386)

Imagen del Marq

04-07-2016, 16:00

tfh wrote:

It's always funny to see how "Linux people" say: "Just compile it yourself it's easy..."
And still they wonder why the avarge user prefers Windows over Linux...

It's also funny how some people expect service, as if the non-paid developers somehow owe them something. Being the maintainer of a couple of projects, I grant you packaging and testing software for end users is the least interesting duty involved in the developent.

Por tfh

Paragon (1722)

Imagen del tfh

04-07-2016, 16:11

Marq wrote:
tfh wrote:

It's always funny to see how "Linux people" say: "Just compile it yourself it's easy..."
And still they wonder why the avarge user prefers Windows over Linux...

It's also funny how some people expect service, as if the non-paid developers somehow owe them something. Being the maintainer of a couple of projects, I grant you packaging and testing software for end users is the least interesting duty involved in the developent.

Nah, that's not my point at all. What I mean is that quite a lot of (Linux) developers overestimate the capabilities of the average user. Nothing more, nothing less...

Por rolandve

Expert (113)

Imagen del rolandve

04-07-2016, 21:33

wolf_ wrote:

I thought Linux had a visual interface with 3d blocks, so simple even a kid could operate it! Wink

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dFUlAQZB9Ng

Thats not even Unix, its Irix, the Unixish Operating System from Silicon Graphics Incorporated in 90ties. That was a tool in the Magic Desktop that ran Fvwm. The block program is a shell that represented the usage of the filesystem.These machines had everything Macs would have later on, great design, performance, dedicated hardware and a unix based operating system. They didn't make it because these machines were to expensive.

Even now the design of these machines is cool B-)

Por Creepy

Champion (332)

Imagen del Creepy

04-07-2016, 22:19

Meits wrote:

Why isn't there a script that compiles it for the user?

They way to install the needed dependencies is different for different kinds of Linux distributions, so it is impossible to write a generic script which works an all the different distribution (or even different versions between a distribution).

Por Manuel

Ascended (15371)

Imagen del Manuel

04-07-2016, 22:43

Creepy wrote:

Compiling stuff can be easy. Making OpenMSX compile is not easy because of the needed dependencies. I can compile it because I've done that a couple of times but it is always a bit of a search to try and install the correct libs to get it to compile with all the features.

Then again, if you use ubuntu or mint, please see https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/openmsx ;)

In Debian based distros you can easily install all build dependencies with a single command line: apt-get build-dep openmsx
Really easy, don't you think?
It's even mentioned in the manual here: http://openmsx.org/manual/compile.html#libs

Por Marq

Champion (386)

Imagen del Marq

05-07-2016, 13:20

tfh wrote:

Nah, that's not my point at all. What I mean is that quite a lot of (Linux) developers overestimate the capabilities of the average user. Nothing more, nothing less...

If you want the latest bleeding-edge stuff on any platform, you probably need to compile from the source.

Por tfh

Paragon (1722)

Imagen del tfh

05-07-2016, 13:44

Marq wrote:
tfh wrote:

Nah, that's not my point at all. What I mean is that quite a lot of (Linux) developers overestimate the capabilities of the average user. Nothing more, nothing less...

If you want the latest bleeding-edge stuff on any platform, you probably need to compile from the source.

I don't think TS was talking about bleeding edge stuff or nightly builds ;-)

Página 2/3
1 | | 3