Slashdot Mirror
Transgaming Bringing Windows Games to Linux (?)
An anonymous reader wrote in to point us to transgaming which is
trying to get the DirectX APIs on Linux, and make it possible to run
DirectX games on our OS. What is perhaps more interest is their perspective on how to get paid for their work. Not sure how I feel about this whole thing.
hard to believe, unless they're running the webserver off a 386 ...
Corollary to Moore's Law: The IQ of new computer owners is declining.
basically they want $100,000 and then they will put all of their code back into wine.
20,000 people $5 each, not that much of a problem to me.
If everyone is going to get upset by this then I suggest you write something else and GPL it.
"It's better to regret something you have done, than to regret something you haven't done" - Orbital
Does NOONE do any research on slashdot anymore? Look here! *sigh* :-)
And I wonder why my articles keep getting rejected.
[--- PGP key and more on http://www.root42.de ---]
One aspect of TransGaming's model is based on the Street Performer Protocol. We are licensing some of our 3D code under the Aladdin Free Public License, which restricts certain forms of commercial redistribution. Users may freely download and use the software, but will be encouraged to subscribe to our subscription service. We will not release that code under a less restrictive license (such as the Wine license) unless and until we have a paying subscriber base of at least 20,000 users. This means that our work will not be fully incorporated into the main Wine source base before that point. Further development of our work will also be predicated on that subscriber base being sustained. This gives our customers a direct incentive to stick with us - if our subscription revenue dries out, so will our release of new code.
.. it is not. This is more like Public Broadcasting's subscription model... the content is freely available to all, but some people NEED to support it or there will not be any new content... period. I hope this works. I'm a big fan of the PBS model.
That's an interesting approach, "We've got you by the balls, so keep paying". While some people will be quick to point out "This is just a friendlier version of MicroSoft's subscription model"
While I understand the reasoning behind emulating another (more popular) platform, it causes more problems than it solves.
If we didn't emulate quicktime using WINE, then Apple would either have to make a native app, or loose that part of the market to RealNetworks.
Of course, sometimes the company will do just that (refuse to port an application). But that's how the economy works. Those companies that suit your needs should be the ones you use. The ones that ignore you should go out of business.
With emulation, programmers need to work their collective asses off to get an application working every release, and that work could be better spent elsewhere. So, demand native apps, and let the ones that refuse, loose market-share.
Slashdot gets worse every day... Pipedot: News for nerds, without the corporate slant
Transgaming is cool. Read the submission they wrote to the Canadian government's copyright comment process.
I hate to say it, but there aren't too many examples of companies who focuss on open source software who are making very much money. It is difficult for startups especially. I suggest people put the 100$ or so they would save by not having to purchase windows to good use by supporting the developers. If this thing works out, you won't need to dual-boot anymore anyway.
GoatPigSheep, the 3 most important food groups
How difficult is it to emulate a moving target such as DirectX, especially since driver support on Linux is limited, and Microsoft seems to release a new DirectX version every 6 months or a year?
On the other hand, their subscription service looks interesting, although how much people will pay to "guide" their work to their favorite games is rather questionable. These things are not business apps, and the entire concept is made less palatable by the fact that the longer it takes to get a game running, the less desirable the game is.
why not actually write some linux games that don't owe anything to windows?
why is it that the linux community invests so much time and effort in trying to be windows, in trying to emulate windows, in trying to "steal" attention from windows when they should just be concentrating on making the bext possible linux?
are they really that jealous for attention?
do they feel that's the only way they can attract users?
lookit, you've got an audience of easily ten million people with linux! don't tell me the only thing these people are interested in is backwards compatibility in some form or another with windows! and before you flame me, yes, porting windows games on a code level is a kind of backwards compatibility.
i'm convinced that there is a very deep and very real hypocrisy that underscores a lot of what the linux community does. they've emulated the look-and-feel for windows, they've written emulators for apps, they've basically busted their butts to make linux more "windows-like" in every respect.
linux is not windows and should not TRY to be windows in any way, shape or form. it is wrong, it is sterile, it is counterproductive, and it makes the linux community into its own worst enemy.
now you my flame my lame unworthy ass.
In the end, I'm not sure how much difference there is between totally Free software and this company's idea from the consumer side. What game theory and economist types call the freeloader problem is when a few people get stuck shouldering the burden for what is really a common good. This company seems to just up the ante, since only a small portion of the user base will have to take on the job of supporting the programmers. It does at least give the option of allowing users to 'rotate' -- people can pay for only one year's subscription, then let someone else take their spot when it runs out. But it's anyone's guess whether this will actually happen. I forsee the company having to regularly reissue a big threat to withdraw their software unless a few thousand people send them some money, which may or may not work. Because the company's finances and subscription rolls won't be open to the public, any statistics the company offers about the number of subscribers will be treated as suspect, allowing worries about extortion and broken promises.
To be honest, I think the underlying philosophy of their idea is pretty damn cool. It's sort of like the board of a small church or a neighborhood association, in that members of the community take turns assuming responsibility for the entire group. But without the same level of information on both sides of the relationship -- in a church, everyone knows who has taken their turn, because it's done publicly -- I think it may be doomed to fail.
Looks like someone's been abusing his copy of Photoshop.
my nameserver is flaky :)
Corollary to Moore's Law: The IQ of new computer owners is declining.
http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=00/12/30/142723 7
Although such a move is very good for Linux for short term, on long term this will be a trap for Linux, because no one would care to make anything special for it anymore.
Remember, to lure users to migrate to Linux, we need something different, something better than they already have.
If Linux was the same as Windows, why they would prefer it over Windows ?
I hope it works out for them. Commercially successfully companies are badly needed for Linux. The production of new high-class software has dropped as fast as the bankrupt filing rate on the Linux scene.
However, I must say the the street performer protocol is quite pathetic. Something better is needed.
Actually I don't really understand why people are so upset by subscription based businessmodels, I think they are quite fair for everyone.
I develop software for you and you pay me as long as you are interrested in using it. If you don't want to use it, switch to other software.
It makes it easier to switch , not so heavily startup investments that you later can't abbandon. For example, if you build a product around Oracle, how easy is it to switch to another database vendor? The initial investments are huge so you basically can't switch later on, you are stuck with what you have.
I would be happy to participate in an open source project, but they seldom are easy to jump into. You have to have task lists, simple routines to write, and a bunch of systems integrators to put those routines together into the code's baseline.
Plus, Mythical Man Month makes a strong case that systems complexity increases with the cube of the number of developers. This makes open source more susceptible to systems complexity issues due to the large number of people interacting with it. Just some ideas... Anyone disagree with my presumptions?
Unitarian Church: Freethinkers Congregate!
For the last several years, Linux-based companies have been struggling with the problem of how to make money from free software. The problem, of course, is the difficulty of convincing users to pay for software that can be downloaded and freely copied from the Internet. Instead of paying for the software itself, Linux companies have followed several different business models that amount to charging for ancillary products and support that surround the core software, which remains free. The reasons for the development of these models is clear: Linux, and the majority of Open Source software is in economic terms a "free good", and selling a free good makes about as much sense as charging for air.
At TransGaming, we believe that in order for Linux to succeed with consumers in the long run, we need innovation not only in software development, but also in the social sphere. We need to encourage more user participation in the development process, and give users more responsibility, both financially and otherwise, for the ultimate result. We view our work on two levels: at the software level, we're creating a way for Windows games to run on Linux. At the social level, we're running an experiment in how to create a sustainable economic model for the development of free software that also gives users the incentive to participate more actively in the creative process.
One aspect of TransGaming's model is based on the Street Performer Protocol. We are licensing some of our 3D code under the Aladdin Free Public License, which restricts certain forms of commercial redistribution. Users may freely download and use the software, but will be encouraged to subscribe to our subscription service. We will not release that code under a less restrictive license (such as the Wine license) unless and until we have a paying subscriber base of at least 20,000 users. This means that our work will not be fully incorporated into the main Wine source base before that point. Further development of our work will also be predicated on that subscriber base being sustained. This gives our customers a direct incentive to stick with us - if our subscription revenue dries out, so will our release of new code.
Our customers will have several direct means of guiding the work we do. First and foremost, they will have the right to vote on which game we work on next - giving them control over our development priorities. Second, they can file bug reports to which we will respond within three working days. Users who file high-quality bug reports will not only see their bug report dealt with promptly, but will receive additional voting status, making their votes count more. Users who believe that we're doing a good job can 'tip' us, by subscribing at higher monthly charges - those who do so will of course receive a higher voting status. And finally, users who believe that we're not adequately addressing their needs can tell us so by unsubscribing altogether.
Developers in the community who want to contribute code or bug fixes to the project can do so under the Wine license, since their patches can then be distributed within our current version, under the AFPL, as well as eventually to the main WineHQ tree. Since we're always looking for skilled developers, we may offer regular contributors contracts to work on particular development areas, or games that our users have requested.
Quit whining about whoring... I'm already capped from comments, not providing "mirroring" on Slashdot.woof.
If the Work normally reads commands interactively when run, you must cause it, at each time the Work commences operation, to print or display an announcement including an appropriate copyright notice and a notice that there is no warranty (or else, saying that you provide a warranty).
~:$ cp 1.txt 2.txt
cp: THE SERVICE AND SOFTWARE ARE PROVIDED "AS IS," WITHOUT WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, EITHER EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION WARRANTIES THAT THE SOFTWARE AND THE SERVICE ARE (A) FREE OF DEFECTS OR ERRORS, (B) VIRUS FREE, (C) ABLE TO...
$5 per month isn't really that much for that kind of product. I would say it's quite cheap.
I seriously doubt however that they will have any chance of success in the long run if they plan to live on only $100.000 a month.
This product are going to require many developers who works on it to keep up with the changes and updates to DX. They will need a bigger userbase or charge more.
I have some mixed feelings about this, it is good that I can run diablo 2 on linux (I really want that because now I can't play it at all) . On the other hand this might be the well knows "OS/2" effect
Because the win16 support of OS/2 was so good no company made native OS/2 programs... and we all know what happened to OS/2... don't we?
Why can't we all just stick with our OS and wait a little while for Loki to port it?? If and IF we BUY games instead of pirating them like most windows players do. Gaming industries will make more games faster.
Fighting for peace is like fucking for virginity
Their subscription policy sounds like it has been developed with some thought, but I see some potential problems.
First, I would be bothered investing in TransGaming's product knowing that my return could possibly dry up due to other people pulling out.
Steven King tried this method a while back with a mixed result. Sure, he made a bit of money selling it directly to his readers, but the forced honor system he set up didn't end up working. Luckily for his fans, King continued to release the other chapters.
What we have seen thusfar in street performer protocols is that they really don't help the little guy. King could afford to conduct his experiment -- he has some money to burn, and a rather loyal following.
Second, with a 'nobody' like TransGaming, their product has to carry all the weight. It would have to work incredibly well - be fast, stable, and versitile - before I could see them getting any subscription. This is going to be incredibly hard when a 100% perfect product already exists to do this: Windows.
Most linux users I know still dual boot to play games. This doesn't really bother them, and it shouldn't; you use the right tool for the job.
I agree it would be nifty to be able to play DirectX games in Linux, but from their website it sounds like this is another rolling emulation system and it will probably have to go through some serious updating before a new game works under it. It sounds like to get a new game working, the subscribers first need to vote on it, then help test it by sending in bug reports.
This is a lot of work for a game that out of the box will run fine in windows. I miss the appeal.
I don't like being cynical about these types of things. Someday someone will break the system and find a good way to make money off of open source. For this reason I don't blame these guys for trying. I just think that in their case, it is going to be rather hard to achieve the quality of software that subscribers would feel entitled to when they could just boot Windows instead.
I dont exactly recall slashdot being the developers of Linux..... coulda sworn it was some grad student in finland 10 years ago that now [lives|works|plays|maintains Linux] in silicon valley somewhere.
Without some limiting method for money-based votes, 100 people giving $1000 each would have more say and effective control than 20,000 each signing up for $5. This is how Congress already works in the US.
woof.
Why do they have Q3 team Arena (fairly high ) on that vote list ???
I runs native under linux just fine.
42
As far as I'm concerned, this model is a very practical approach that only helps Free Software ideals - it really maked no difference to me whether or not they merge the code back into the wine tree officially, because they do it themselves! All the winex code is just Wine + DirectX API's - so one can just use WineX instead of Wine - unless you are wanting to port a commercial directx application over to linux using wine - but who cares about that or would even want to buy something like that. The one thing I am interested in here, is will it be possible now for Xwindows programmers to utilize DirectX in Linux natively, w/o using Wine emulation?
3 of the games in the top 25 of their voting section are already available on Linux (Quake 3, Unreal Tournament, Tribes 2). So let me get this straight, people will pay for a $5 a month subscription to this thing, but they won't shell out $10 for a linux version of Quake 3?
Don't get me wrong, I love open source software, use it every day of my life, and I'm starting to dabble in development. And when I do, everything I do will be GPLd. I get really annoyed by companies ripping off GPLd software.
But... As an awful lot of commercial firms are showing, it's very, very hard to make money out of GPLd software. As long as this firm are within the legal limits of the GPL as regards to the modifications they're making to WINE, I say all power to them. Let the market judge whether they should succeed or not.
As to how useful this is... Several people have discussed doubt about the fact that DirectX is a moving target. Well, given the slowness inherent in even the best-written software emulation, I suspect that won't be a problem; ultra-new games are going to be a bit too slow to play, anyway. However, I have a massive library of DirectX games I'd love to unlock that would be very playable. In fact, I've been looking long and hard at DosEMU lately, and I suspect it's probably now easier to make really old DOS games work under Linux that under Win2k.
You win again, gravity!
Hey, I think it is a great idea. I've been waiting for a company to do a little from column A, a little from column B in an intelligent way for a long time. Companies have been acting in such a one-sided way for so long that we forget that they do kinda have to make some money. I definately like this approach. If the technology penetrates the market enough, they will do the socially responsible thing. Software being OS gets more important (never mind more effective) as the technology depentrates deeper into the market. Plus, companies have to have ways of protecting their licences when they release their products OS, so it makes sense that they would want some capital before going OS.
"Old man yells at systemd"
I hate to be the voice of reason, but these are the same type of numbers that lots of the dot bomb's used to validate their (now failed) business models.
..."
Dot bombs were often quoted as saying stuff like "if we just get 25% of the market, *only* 15,000 subscribers we will
They expect to get 20,000 linux users to subscribe to a monthly service instead of dual booting. Personally I would rather pay for win98 once rather than pay a monthly fee for what is probably going to be a worse product.
It will probably be worse because they have to keep the API up to date against a fast moving target (direct X), and all this is entirely pointless if X and GNU/Linux doesn't keep up with the latest and greatest hardware that gamers crave.
I personally think Loki had the right idea, but they learned that people would rather just dual boot, it is simple, clean and flexable. Dual booting allows you to play WHATEVER windows games you want!
As this page, which includes many demos from Loki, proves, SDL is at least one, fairly easy to learn, free alternative to DirectX. Do we really need DirectX that badly?
Make a bootable CD-ROM with Win32 kernel. Run the game directly from the CD, and write a small hardware config file to the hard drive (where Linux is still safely installed). Saved games could be stored there as well.
I have GPL'ed this idea. Enjoy.
You have something above your lip.
These people are so bloody backwards as to think that near perfect direct x api emulation will gain us native applications. Why this is, I do not know. After having spoken with their coders at LWCE, I doubt they understand what a native binary is, let alone how they can compare api emulation to native binaries. The worst part is when they tell me that SDL is so similar, when it's not. SDL isn't emulating any behaviour, it is an API. It may be similar in some respects to DirectX, but it is not letting you use non-native binaries in Linux. People who want to support microsoft emulation have tried before, succeded in emulation, and then promptly failed as nobody wrote native applications for their operating system (OS/2 anybody?). If you want Linux gaming through companies like Loki (who produce native games) to fail, buy whatever these jokers are going to sell you.
If you want Linux to succede as a desktop so we can be finally free of the shackles we support when we buy into propietary API's like DirectX, and become the gaming platform of choice, buy native games from online stores like tuxgames. Do not spend one dime on what isn't native and you won't be funding the market speak of sales figures against a Linux desktop.
Check out ioquake3.org for a great, free, First-Person Shooter engine!
Considering just how important Real Networks is these days in the marketplace, I don't see how Apple or Microsoft are being hurt by ignoring the Linux market. It certainly isn't doing Real any good. (maybe your comment should say "the companies that ignore markets that actually matter should go out of business"
-- "So they told me that using the download page to download something was not something they anticipated." - Bill Gates
It's a Windows API layer, which the applications use to communicate with the hardware, just like the Windows API in Windows NT itself, for example.
A better example (I think - I'm no expert) would be the Win16 API in IBM's OS/2.
Actually using such a API layer is how MS can get Windows applications working natively on 2 completelly different OSes - the DOS based W9X/ME & WinNT/2K/XP, which sort of evolved out of Digital VMS & IBM OS/2. There's no commonality between the 2 OSes other than both having a Windows API so the same applications work for both platforms. So all WINE is, is another Windows API for another platform (Linux & potentially other X86 nixes), so the same Windows applications will work NATIVELLY with 3 different OSes, instead of 2, without any re-compiling, or anything.
Actually I've always wondered why the people behind all the X86 nixes (the X86 varieties of Sco/Caldera Unix, Solaris, BSD, QNX, Linux, etc) don't get together & develop a common GUI API layer. So the same GUI applications could work with all the X86 nixes natively without any re-compiling or anything.
Ultimately, the solution to this is to write it yourself if you don't like they way they do business, which is what open source is all about. I'd personally like to see two projects doing Direct* support, so you could choose between them. Competition is good for consumers. :)
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
I for one hope this effort is successful. Linux is great, but a lot of what I do with my computers is entertainment, and Windows is presently beating Linux in that department. Take that away, and I'll never boot Windows again, and I know there are others out there with the same view. Get more games on Linux and you'll see a great many of them make the switch.
Oh, come now. People deserve to be paid. If you don't want to pay $5 a month, you don't have to....If $5 a month is worth it to you to play DirectX games with WINE, then great, go for it!
People don't have some kind of obligation to give away their code open source. Many do, out of the goodness of their heart. These people are willing to do so, but they want some kind of compensation. I think this is a good thing....one big problem with OSS is that it is too reliant on volunteers and others who don't have a real stake in getting the job done. Thats why so many projects never get off the ground, never work, or never get finished.
Hopefully, with some kind of monetary compensation, it will provide more of an assurance that this project would be taken to completion (if such a thing truly exists in software). And it sounds like very useful software, so lets cross our fingers.
I know thinking that someone deserves money for their work is evil, so feel free to mod this down...
I honestly don't think it's possible to make an income from open source. By charging for it, it eliminates the whole idea of "free source code".
If one wants to contribute to the community, then do it on a part-time basis. Do not base your entire life on an open source project. Get a paying job, and work to enhance the community in your spare time.
The real problem for these guys is that their planned revenue is by far to little. 20.000 * 5 only makes them $100.000 a month.
:(. Lets be optimistic again and say we will do with only 10 people for all this. Now we have a monthly cost of 4.000x2x30=240.000 USD.
This may sound much to a private person but there are just no way in hell that they are going to be able to developing something as huge and fastmoving as DX for only 100.000 a month. It's doomed to fail. They need a larger userbase than 20.000 or charge more than 5 dollars a month.
The problem for many dot-coms and open source companies is that the people starting and running them just don't understand what kind of money it takes to run even a small company.
In a typical small company without heavy marketing costs and such things the cost for a employee is abour twice his or her salary. Sickness, vacations, training etc etc makes this the typical number.
Lets be as optimistic as possible for to try to give them a chance at all, lets say they will be able to do this with only 20 developers (say 10 people developing new versions and 10 supporting the current one). Lets say each developer has a salary of only 4.000 dollars a month (very low salary in the US). This makes the monthly costs for the developers 4.000(salary)x2(typical employee cost)x20(number of developers). This makes a monthly cost of 160.000 USD. Our budget is already blown away.
Now, you will need some more people, some administrative people, a webadim, a secretary, some project leaders, some people writing documentation and yes, you will need law people
To be realistic I think they need atleast 300.000 USD a month to have a chance of succeding in the long run.
The real problem for these guys is that their planned revenue is by far to little. 20.000 * 5 only makes them $100.000 a month.
:(. Lets be optimistic again and say we will do with only 10 people for all this. Now we have a monthly cost of 4.000x2x30=240.000 USD.
This may sound much to a private person but there is just no way in hell that they are going to be able to developing something as huge and fastmoving as DX for only 100.000 a month. It's doomed to fail. They need a larger userbase than 20.000 or charge more than 5 dollars a month.
The problem for many dot-coms and open source companies is that the people starting and running them just don't understand what kind of money it takes to run even a small company.
In a typical small company without heavy marketing costs and such things the cost for a employee is abour twice his or her salary. Sickness, vacations, training, taxes etc etc makes this the typical number.
Lets be as optimistic as possible to try to give them a chance at all. Lets say they will be able to do this with only 20 developers (say 10 people developing new versions and 10 supporting the current one). Lets say each developer has a salary of only 4.000 dollars a month (very low developer salary in the US). This makes the monthly costs for the developers 4.000(salary)x2(typical employee cost)x20(number of developers). This makes a monthly cost of 160.000 USD. Our budget is already blown away.
Now, you will need some more people, some administrative people, a webadim, a secretary, some project leaders, some people writing documentation and yes, you will need law people
However, you have to be a magician to get good software developers anywhere in the US/Europe/Canada for only 4.000 a month. And pulling a project like this with only 20 developers would be a amazing archivement.
To be realistic I think they need atleast 400.000 USD a month to have a chance at all of succeding in the long run.
I really wish them the best but they will have a tough time pulling this off.
Because they work the same way with Windows 95 applications as WINE does. Through a Windows API.
Yes just as both (DOS based) W9X/ME & WinNT/2K/XP (which sort of evolved from Digital VMS & IBM's OS/2) use a Windows API so windows applications work nativelly with both OSes (even though they are completely different), WINE is a Windows API so the same applications can work natively in Linux (& potentially other X86 nixes) in exactly the same way, without re-compiling or anything.
IF WINE was a emulator, it could be re-compiled to work with PPC Linux or Alpha (thats a CPU platform, now 64bit, that was developed by Digital cum Compaq & made by Samsung & Intel) Linux. But no, as a API layer it only works with the same X86 hardware that Windows works on. So its only compatible with X86 Linux boxes.
However in theory if WINE was developed for Alpha Linux then Windows applications written/re-compiled for Digital Alpha WinNT4 (MS put out a re-compile of NT4 for the Alpha CPU platform), would then work natively in a Digital Alpha Linux box.
Hint... The name gives it all away:
Wine
Is
Not an
Emulator
Rather, it's an attempt to duplicate Windows APIs on linux. An altogether different thing that an emulator.
X-Box --Let me explain how this relates--
By creating a home video game console *and*, at the same time, facilitating the process of porting from said console to the PC (or vice-versa), Microsoft has created a mechanism by which video game companies may increase profit.
It is no surprise that successful home video games are ported to PC's, or PC games ported to video game consoles. It is done because there is money to be made.
The only reason why companies do not port EVERY game to EVERY platform is due to the cost of the port itself.
What does this have to do with this linux porting group? Well, pretty soon nearly all video games will be X-Box/PC based. This means that the development environment will become increasingly similar, and pretty much all PC games will be on the X-Box. If these guys work on an X-Box emulator early on, porting will be simplified (cheaper!).
Personally, I feel that this concept is fairly interesting; however, I am not going to pay a subscription service for someone to make something that I can already buy and use at a much lower cost.
If projects such as GNOME, Qt, KDE and KOffice, etc. -- that is, ones that actually can significantly the Linux operating system's usability and thus overall support -- are the projects that should consider a funding scheme similar to this. I would certainly pay a small monthly subscription fee to support and help direct the development of such projects.
Even Linux distribution vendors (MandrakeSoft, RedHat, etc) could benefit from something like this. I have no desire to run out to the store and buy a brand spanking new copy of Mandrake every time I want to see how the project is coming along. I would, however, pay $5/month to support its development and try and get some of the horrible bugs out, so that when I do grab the latest disk set off of the net, it will actually install correctly and actually have some functional package management.
I applaud Transgamming on their work, they've done a great job so far (you can play Heavy Metal FAKK2, and American McGee's Alice perfect) although speed is an issue. On my 1.4 T-Bird 512MB RAM I can run these games @ 800x600 and only get approximately 20-30FPS, this is a major slowdown, as I get 60-80 natively in windows (yuck, I know I only dual boot for those games, and Serious Sam) What would be really nice though is if VMWare could figure out a way (More thank likely through a kernel module) to allow us to use native drivers for the hardware. If I could install the Detonator XPs under VMware, I"m sure it'd rock the fuckin' house, just like dokken dio and deicide. I'm no hardware/coding expert but from a logical standpoint, we have the source for the kernel, it controls all of the hardware, would it really be that hard to patch the kernel to allow us to directly access the hardware? I mean VMWare could even use their own X Server, so that from a console you could run VMware, and they're transparent X server would run loading the native drivers, or something... I dunno this is just a rant.....
Its kind of sad that they're going about things this way. On the otherhand, I think that opensource is usually better applied to infrastructure than entertainment. Opensource is the bread that all the butter manufacturers get together to make because they want to make money selling butter. Unfortunately alot of them forget that they're in the butter business or at least to market themselves as such. And some just start out backwards and try and right themselves later.
All that being said, transgaming has a huge bit of a problem. There has yet to be a successful hybrid model between opensource and traditional. Up to now every attempt has been a failure. Often because of backlash or confusion.
Personally I think they'd do better selling their services/expertise to game manufacturers.
"We've got you by the balls, so keep paying"
I think this is a great model, and I've been thinking a lot about it. The only flaw I can come up with is this: What happens if they change their mind when they have 19999 users? In other words, there ought to be some sort of service for people who want to use a model like this to guarantee that once 20000 people actually subscribe, the source comes out. Perhaps if a trusted third party would hold a copy of the source for them and be given the legal right to release it when, in their judgement, the terms of the protocol have been fulfilled.
I wanted to check out transgaming's web page to see if they do something like this but it seems to have been slashdotted. Any karma-working-girls out there have a mirror or a link to the google cache?
bryguy
microsoftword.mp3 - it doesn't care that they're not words...
Then Windows 2000 & Windows XP are emulators
:-) However, I see nothing in the definition of emulator that says it has to run on each and every platform, so you're argument basically falls flat on its face.
If you want to make that argument, then go for it.
IF WINE was a emulator, it could be re-compiled to work with PPC Linux or Alpha (thats a CPU platform, now 64bit, that was developed by Digital cum Compaq & made by Samsung & Intel) Linux.
I'm well aware of what an Alpha is. I have a nice Mutlia that I use to heat my apartment during the winter
According to every definition of emulator that I've seen (including the one in a previous post that was from the WINE faq), WINE qualifies.
Dinivin
I would really love to see DX support in linux. But I don't think that this will be possible until linux gets a wider range of users...
------
Sig
all i know is that if they get ff7, deus ex, system shock 2 and outcast to work on linux i'm getting rid of windos forever! bwhahahaha, then i would be really free!
People who complain about paying for software and yet demand perfect bug free constantly updated programs ALWAYS seem to forget a critical detail:
Most people still have to work to support themselves.
Any 'pro-bono' effort by an individual or team will always have to take a back seat to earning a living.
Most free software advocates forget this. These idealistic profit-bashers are also rampant in the OSS community, and it may well lead to its downfall. Several fine companies have died because not enough people have ponied up cash to support them. How many of you are using store-bought distros?
Anyone who thinks that updated DirectX compatibility can be provided that keeps up with the frenzied pace of the game industry and STILL be free is smoking crack.
A subscription model like the one Transgaming is suggesting strikes me as a perfect solution. If enough people are willing to pay a certain amount per month to play DirectX games under Linux, the people involved don't have to seek other ways of sustaining themselves.
I for one am going to support these guys, because I believe that the main reason most people stick with Windows because of the games.
$60/year for a subscription to Transgaming...
Or once every two years I can go buy the latest OS upgrade from Microsoft for $99.
Once you throw in the purchase of a RedHat or SuSE distribution once a year on top of that transgaming subscription... the Microsoft solution is looking pretty damn cheap by comparison.
I'll be the first to admit that the Linux gift culture cannot be sustained long term due to the growing complexities of the software world. but I don't know that this new idea is a viable solution compared to the regular commercial software market. I'd say go back to the drawing board and work on the idea...
Two words. No one. NO ONE.
Your cheap !!!!! When Linux means FREE it means free access to source code and ideas and technologies, IT DOES NOT MEAN YOU SHOULD NOT HAVE TO PAY FOR IT. How long do you think companies in the linux area will survive, while giving away their software for free ? Not Long ! I'm all for free , when it means sharing source code and technology, but no where in that damn GNU license does it say SOFTWARE MUST COST $0 !!!!! It's insane, linux would be weel on it's way to being atleast a recognized desktop alternative if all you would pull your head out fo the sand and stop screaming " I wont pay for it if it cost me anything. You make me sick! Pay for the damn software, support these companies. I will gladly pay 49.95 for a game at the store if it can be ran on linux.
And dont think I am some winning Windows user. I user Linux at home and and busy trying to convince my boss at work that we should replace alot of our windows systems with linux. I dont sit around and complain to bring forth change, I make it happen !
If transgaming is profitable, then everyone in open source can follow a similar model, and Open source will once and for all be proven profitable.
If transgaming fails, it will go the other way around.
I think slashdot could take a tip from transgaming, I'd pay $1 a year to access one of my favorite websites. I'd pay $5 a month to have games on linux.
Selling services instead of information may be the key to profitability for the new economy, the GNU economy.
I plan to support transgaming, I have my $5 ready.
I expect everyone here using linux to support them because the success or failure of open source in the minds of the public rests on transgamings shoulders.
If you use Linux, please help development of Autopac
Programmers deserve money, we are paying for their time and NOT their information.
This is what GNU is all about, every supporter of GNU should subscribe to transgaming just to support the GNU based economy and prove free software is profitable.
Once its proven profitable, game developers will begin making games for linux, hardware people will make drivers, everything will change.
If you use Linux, please help development of Autopac
Actually I've always wondered why the people behind all the X86 nixes (the X86 varieties of Sco/Caldera Unix, Solaris, BSD, QNX, Linux, etc) don't get together & develop a common GUI API layer. So the same GUI applications could work with all the X86 nixes natively without any re-compiling or anything.
Actually, there is such a common GUI layer-- it is called X.
However, like all *nix software, there are other incompatabilities, most notably in the C-libraries and even a few differences in the kernel itself. However, note that, with the proper packages installed, you CAN run compiled Linux binaries on FreeBSD. In short, it is not the problem with the GUI layer-- it is a problem with underlying componants.
One of the dangers though is that WINE could reduce the need for people to develop software for Linux. That is pretty minor, though, because I think that Microsoft will STILL have a had time competing with Linux.
LedgerSMB: Open source Accounting/ERP
Thats plenty of money for a software company.
hire 5 programmers at $100,000 each, maybe have 2-3 website developers, and you'll still survive.
Now growth however would require more money, but i expect more than $100,000 a month, i mean theres more than 100,000 linux users who will sign up to this thing, and you can pay more than $5 a month, so lets wait and see.
Thats their bare minimum they need to survive.
If you use Linux, please help development of Autopac
I think this is the best for GNU and open source software to be profitable.
If people need something bad enough, require they pay for the service, and its done.
NOT THE CODE, once the codes released, its open source, which means you can improve it.
You just want the service, not the code itself, the code once released, is owned by us, but we need programmers to make the code.
If you use Linux, please help development of Autopac
If everyone thinks a company will be successful they all put their money into it
if the company fails, they all stop paying, the end.
The code however STILL exsists so you DO get a return.
Someone will work on the code
If you use Linux, please help development of Autopac
What do you think redhat is doing?
When you pay programmers to write the code, you arent paying for the code, you are paying for the service of the programmers.
The code is open source, you OWN the code.
If you use Linux, please help development of Autopac
Dont make comments without doing research.
If you use Linux, please help development of Autopac
They are charging for the SERVICE.
we pay the programs for their hard work
this is FAIR.
paying for software or information which we dont own however is not fair.
If you use Linux, please help development of Autopac
With Microsoft, you never actually OWN your OS, or your software, or anything, you just rent it.
$60 a year is dirt cheap
Some people prefer linux over windows and would like to pay alittle extra to break free from windows forever
If you use Linux, please help development of Autopac
Has it occurred to you that the dictionary definition might be wrong? Of course not, you probably think that theirs only one 'i' in the word 'aluminium'.
Wine.
Is.
Not.
(an)
Emulator.
It's a win32 api. The Microsoft Windows API is another win32 api. You could probably write a win32 api for the Mac. The only problem is, without instruction interpretation (which I think most people will agree, is the true meaning of 'emulation'), the api would be useless, unless you recompiled the application.
As someone else said, you can implement the POSIX api, without being a POSIX emulator. Windows NT is not a POSIX emulator. Nor is it a Win9x emulator. It just has both apis.
Wine is no different from any native Linux api. If Linus had decided to implement win32 calls instead of POSIX, wine would never have existed. We might have had a POSIX implementation later on (like wine), but it wouldn't be called an emulator. It would be a reimplementation of win32, with a POSIX api.
Reverse the roles to what we have now, and Linux is getting a new api set. That's all.
We Is Not Emulating.
"I think he was truly surprised at how little I cared about how big a market the Mac had" - Linus on Jobs
Posted by CmdrTaco himself back in January. Has anything new been brought to the table about this? No. Come on, people. Just because news is a bit slow doesn't mean we have to resort to digging up old news.
assert(expired(knowledge));
We should pay for the service.
Not the software, but the hard work of programmers who write it.
They deserve it.
But the code must always be free, as information should never have a price, just hard work and services.
If you use Linux, please help development of Autopac
why would they set it as the minimum
If you use Linux, please help development of Autopac
So if MS changes XP to subscription and it's $5/month, is it quite cheap for that product?
Why or why not?
Who here wants to reboot every time they want to play a game, then reboot to play another game, THEN reboot to get back to your regular old system (*nix) raise you hand.
The goal of computer science is to build something that will last at least until we've finished building it.
Moderating morons! The parent (both of em) are either informative/insightful or informative/offtopic. Stop with your damn crack smoking! ...
Guess I'd better keep meta-modding
So, their "Open Source Philosophy" is not to be an Open Source project. Until they have 20000 (!) subscribers. Then, well, they'll think about it.
It's fine if they don't want to be open source, but I think they shouldn't pretend (by putting a big bold title 'Open Source Philosophy' and then mention in the 3rd paragraph they'll be using the AFPL, and then you have to click a link to find out that the AFPL is not Open Source).
Did you ever hear of Bleem!?
A commercial PSX emulator. At the time it first came out, the best such emulator available, far from complete, but pretty cheap. A lot of people bought it, having been given the impression that it would continue to be developed until it was finished.
It didn't work, of course. Development continued for a fair while, and there was a fair bit of improvement, but then the releases dried up, and the product was still nowhere near as good as had been promised. And by that time, the free alternatives were catching up.
A lot of people got left with a bitter taste in their mouth over that one.
Yes, these people are entitled to charge for their work. But buying into an unfinished bit of software doesn't buy you any guarantees, and it does increase the pressure on the people being paid considerably.
Frankly, the existing model - either you release your software for free, or you charge for it when it's finished - seems better all round.
I guess it's good that TransGaming is cool enough to be posted on 3 times. I thought 2 was overkill, but whatever. It's good to remind people of what they should already know every few weeks I guess.
Now for my opinion. TransGaming's wine, or forkx as I call it, will be cool for running legacy apps like Thief and other good games that will likely never be ported, but at the same time it has the potential to completely kill commercial Linux gaming. That is, if it ever stops sucking and runs something cool (like... Thief)
I don't think anyone should be happy with their "hostage source code" method of operation, but I give them points for creativity on how to make money off open source. All I know is that I would definitely be pissed if I was a wine developer.
All in all though, as far as I can see they've made some fairly good progress with the DirectX stuff in wine. I look forward to the day when this thing actually runs stuff that is useful to me, but if we never see another native port of a commercial game because of TransGaming, it will need to go.
And since that article was posted the only substantive change was the addition of an intro graphic announcing that October 22 there would be news!
Finally a gaming environment for me, the transgendered gamer.
I don't know where you work, but 20 developers is way more than you need.
At my office there's only about 10 developers and we have 3 seperate (successful) product lines that groups of 3 or 4 people devote most of their time to.
Has it occurred to you that the dictionary definition might be wrong? Of course not,
As I mentioned already (and you apparently missed), the definition posted previously in this thread by hawkfan (taken from the the Wine FAQ) actually shows how Wine qualifies as an emulator. Not that there's anything wrong with being an emulator, but it seems somewhat pointless to deny this simply fact.
Dinivin
This seems cool, but the subscription seems kinda fuzzy... the idea is good, but we are talking WINE... we want to make better software than Windows does, not try to be under them. Plus, if they keep this up, we might be so blessed to get those cool viruses... this might be good, or bad.
Sure, they have a right to _want_ to be paid, but they don't have the right _to_ get paid. That's up to us, and whether we decide to give them money. If we don't like the way it looks, we don't give them money. That's the way it is supposed to work.
The feeling is not about them getting paid, but about the method they are going about it and whether it is something we think is worth what they are asking.
There are lots of issues with their plan, as have been elucidated in other posts. Note that one of the concerns is _not_ someone wanting to get paid for their work. But hey, thanks for assuming it was!
The enemies of Democracy are
These idealistic profit-bashers are also rampant in the OSS community
Where, exactly, are you getting this? I haven't seen a single post in this thread that suggests that they shouldn't get paid for their work. I've seen a lot suggesting that maybe it's not worth it to us to pay for their work, or that their model won't succede in the long run... But no "profit-bashers". In fact, I've NEVER seen such a thing. Though I have seen a lot of people react as though someone was saying profit was evil... But they never really were saying that.
But oh well.
The enemies of Democracy are
As a lot of people in the forum seem to be discussing how open source projects could be made profitable, I'd like to add my two cents. If people started writing open source games that were ported to Linux and Windows, then the devlopers could GPL the Linux version and close source the Windows allowing the Windows user to buy software which they are used to paying for. At the same time, Linux users as well as the adventureous Windows user would still be left with the source code to do with what they will. So, the average Windows user would still be getting the pretty packaged product for a fee that they're used to and the software still remains free for all those code hackers who want to use the code. As an added advantage, if a large number of companies started using this model and made a large variety of games, it might slowly attract Joe Average consumer to switch to Linux to get a whole slew of free games that he would normally have to pay for. The only real issue is of course having some people distribute compiled binaries of the Linux port ported to Windows, but then there isn't much I can think of to get around that (except maybe that if you get the official release you get a pretty package and manual).
Dual Booting means yet another OS that you have to maintain. I'd rather play games. (Although I enjoy maintaining Linux ...) And I didn't like the fact that my mail and web servers were unavailable while in Windows.
Few games have kept my attention very long but the availability of games from Loki has satisfied my needs. I haven't installed the Windows drivers for my Nvidia card since it was installed months ago and I'll be able to reclaim that disk space for my linux side.
These people can't do this out of the goodness of their hearts, they have to eat as well.
That said, here we have the chance to get out of windows and play all the games we've bought for windows for the price of one lunch or breakfast a month. I'm there.
Do VMWare, etc even work for 3D? With reasonable performance on a hot system, and with 3D acceleration?
The wine FAQ says it isn't an emulator. And you are arguing that that proves it is?
Emulation usually means instruction interpretation - eg interpreting Z80 code on an x86. This isn't happening here. It could also mean that - eg VMWare - the hardware environment presented to a piece of code is not the actual hardware environment the code is running in.
There is nothing actually being emulated in wine. It consists of an executable loader - like the native linux loader, but works with win32 code -, and a shared library - which is a reimplementation of something that already exists.
No instructions are being interpreted. If a piece of win32 code calls a function cabbage() in the win32 api, then under wine it calls the function cabbage() in the wine library. This is no different from a native linux app calling a function, say cheesecake(), in a library called libcheesecake.so.
Again, I say, We Is Not Emulating.
"I think he was truly surprised at how little I cared about how big a market the Mac had" - Linus on Jobs
It's a great! thing that interest in Linux/UNIX for gaming continues to build. That's what Joe Six-Pack needs in place before switching to Linux or resorting to a PS2.
What does concern me is the involvement of an emulator to run those games. Those APIs will continue to change, anyway, and if the porting of these apps would prioritize direct interfaces to the OS's graphics software, rather than through emulating windows it would achieve broader goals.
I'm sure there are some technically sound reasons for developing DirectX under Wine, and support any development in *n*x gaming, regardless. I'd just think an OpenGL that kicks the snot out of DirectX would send a much more productive and telling message....
www.dedserius.com
VB != VisualBasic
The wine FAQ says it isn't an emulator. And you are arguing that that proves it is?
According to a post above (from hawkfan) the FAQ gives a definition of emulator, which Wine happens to meet. This is not a difficult concept. WINE duplicates the environment that a win32 application runs in.
There is nothing actually being emulated in wine. It consists of an executable loader - like the native linux loader, but works with win32 code -, and a shared library - which is a reimplementation of something that already exists.
In other words, it duplicates an environment that already exists, right? Therefore, it an emulator! See how that works?
Dinivin
I've been running Diablo II on Linux for a while now... You have to run Game.exe of a no cd crack. Running Diablo.exe is useless, and the game won't see what it expects when it tries to read the CDROM :) Be sure to tell wine to use a desktop of 640x480
:) (or one of the OS game projects)
Half-Life already works too
Quake is available for linux already as well as UT.
This leads me to the question of what is this company expect to give the linux community... there are a lot of game projects out there for linux too as well as the ability to run a lot of windows games as well. If I donated $5 to anyone, it would be to the fine developers of wine
Karma Clown
Really, what's to stop Linux from using Microsoft's own philosophy against it? Absorb DirectX into Linux, then make it perform even better under Linux than it ever did under Windows. That's sure to get the attention of at least the game developers and hardcore gamers.
"Fight fire with fire," as they say. I frankly don't have much interest in establishing Linux as a gaming and desktop OS, but I'm surprised at how the people that do care often end up handicapping their efforts under some deluded notion of maintaining OS "purity". Look, there is no such thing as "purity" when it comes to Linux, because its open source nature means that it is always changing. This "impurity" is in fact one of Linux's greatest strengths; it gives it an unparalled capacity to easily absorb new ideas and methods into itself. This advantage should be utilized to the fullest.
The FAQ also says it doesn't emulate the environment. Twit.
.Net emulator, or that Classpath is a Java emulator, or that Konqueror is a Netscape emulator. Wine is an api. Not an emulator. It lets win32 programs run, not by interpreting their system calls, or fooling them that they're running on Windows, but by simply providing the libraries that would be there. This isn't the same as emulating an environment.
Can you not understand this simple statement - reimplementaion is not the same as emulation. You might as well say Linux is a Unix emulator, or that Mono is a
"I think he was truly surprised at how little I cared about how big a market the Mac had" - Linus on Jobs
Does anyone remember when Corel "ported" WordPerfect Office to Linux, using Wine? Does anyone remember how bad it was? I can only imagine how bad DirectX games would suck when run under Wine.
Whats wrong with OpenGL anyway? Instead of trying to use DirectX, developers need to be convinced to go with open alternatives.
Oops. s/theirs/there's/
"I think he was truly surprised at how little I cared about how big a market the Mac had" - Linus on Jobs
... oh wait. You've heard it many times before.
Ummmmmm. Screw it, I'll tell you one more time...
I think it is a bad idea to try to make Linux run Windows executables. IBM made this mistake with OS/2. OS/2 ran Windows applications almost as good (some say even better than) on native Windows. The result was that programmers wrote applications for Windows only, they ran after all on OS/2 also. Little native OS/2 software was written.
Microsoft made Windows a moving target (and it still is ...), making it impossible for IBM to
have the Windows emulation work in OS/2 for every respin of Windows. The
rest is history, please don't let this happen once again with Linux.
RFC1925
YOUR numbers.
10 Million Users.
1.5 % or 150 000 Users interested in games
25% of that or 37 500 Users willing to pay for it
37 500 Users * $5/month = $187 500/month!
Nothing to sneeze at!
Plus... they only request a total of 20 000 paying users to open their code up... thus making the other 112 500 users, interested in games but not interested in paying for them, happy!
Man I HATE statistics
Outside of licensing issues (which I could care less about -- if they could somehow magically get most of my games to work in Linux, I'd switch over from XP immediately) my concerns is if they'll have coverage for the various incarnations of DirectX 8. That's a pretty good API. Particularly, support for things like pixel shaders and programmable elements on nVidia cards -- things that OpenGL have a hard time doing, if at all -- would be welcome. I could do without some of DirectX's foibles (CPU cycles, anyone?) but the API as it stands is pretty impressive.
When they start supporting BSD, I'll start caring.
Until they figure out that WINE runs on other platforms and they support something other than Linux, what is the point of worring about them?
As they have gotten the 'WINE is a linux app' wrong, odds are good they'll only make this work with RedHat...because Redhat is Linux, right?
Actually there was at least one comment from a person who seemed to think that $5 flat was fair, but $5/mo was unreasonable.
-B
The FAQ also says it doesn't emulate the environment. Twit.
It's wrong... It's not like FAQs are always 100% correct.
It lets win32 programs run, not by interpreting their system calls, or fooling them that they're running on Windows, but by simply providing the libraries that would be there.
So it duplicates the environment (the DLLs) necessary to run a win32 application. It emulates. Wow, what a concept.
Now, if you don't think Wine is an emulator, please post a definition of emulate for which Wine doesn't qualify.
Dinivin
Not that there's anything wrong with being an emulator, but it seems somewhat pointless to deny this simply fact.
It's not pointless, it is following a long-established UNIX tradition of denying the obvious with a recursive acronym :)
Living better through chemicals
Well, at least I'm not the only one to realize that saying Wine is not an emulator is denying the obvious.
Dinivin
Fixed prices, subscription quotas, and the threat of withholding (effectively destroying) finished work?
It's complex, inflexible, and requires too much administration and too large a commitment. Can you see yourself signing up for donation subscriptions to support a hundred software projects? Surely you benefit from the efforts of at least that many.
I believe that the best solution is the simplest: just give money to people who have made the stuff you like, don't make them screw around with their own weird variant to make it sound like something other than donation. Don't withhold money from one that is already profitable by the donations of others; huge profits mean that others will be attracted to compete in the area, that's how capitalism allocates resources efficiently over the long term.
If you do that, then people can just get down to the work of figuring out what you want, and making it, knowing from past experience that you can be trusted to make such efforts profitable without coersion.
Recently I ran Starcraft Brood Wars in WINE. Apart from it being slow, hogging every last ounce of resources on by computer, and crashing a bit, it was fine. ;)
I never thought I could've done this, so I was pretty surprised. Since I ran Starcraft off of a real Windows installation on my second hard drive, WINE probably used all the gaming DLLs and other "crap" Starcraft required from that drive.
void women (int money, time_t time);
Well that's not exactly saying "profit is evil", is it...
-------
"Every artist is a cannibal, every poet is a thief."
Lies,
Damn Lies,
Statistics.
WikiAfterDark.com It's a sex wiki, go now!
Unless the peformance is close or better than windows peformance (pretty bloody hard all things considered) It won't be a serious option for msot gamers *anyway*. I sincerely hope they cna pull it off, it would be great and a huge boost to the Linux community, most kids wanna play games, if they can play them under linux it might keep them away from WinXP that little bit more.. Particualry the hacker types who no doubt don't like windows but need their daily counterstrike . Linux needs them for the next generation of OSS coders.
> We will not release that code under a less
> restrictive license (such as the Wine license)
> unless and until we have a paying subscriber base
> of at least 20,000 users.
Why?
I assume that they take the subscription fees, pay themselves their salaries for it and start to develop for the time paid. Repeat.
So, once they wrote code, it is already paid by the subscribers. Why not immediately release it as open-source then?
In that case, subscribers would do nothing else than paying someone (in small portions) to do certain open-source development.
I think that this is a better model, because I don't know, if they will ever open-source the code. With the model I describe, my risk is about 5$, with their model, my risk is all the fees I pay until they reached their goal.
Give me a fucking break. Who is going to do that?
Show me ANY 'linux user' with ANY originality or taste. I've seen the linux screen shots. Every damn one of them try to make their desktops look and behave like Windows.
And the ones that don't have TERRIBLE taste. Good Lord I have seen some of the skins these extreme non-artists have done.
And there is NO market for games for this MORONIC OS. Even Carmack said that if any publisher ports a game to linux they do it out of the goodness out their heart. And do you know why? Because every one of you SLACK ASS OPEN SOURCE BASTARDS want everything for free. Linux user = 'I have to see ALL the source code for anything'. Stupid outlook.
Let me clue you fuckers in to something. Revenue is a good thing. Possible income is what fuels development. And NO some poor guy slaving away to write a game does NOT equal your slack ass sending in a patch for a new option to 'ls'.
And let's not forget the retarded OS. Johnny buys a game. Oops, what build is it for? Hmmmmmm. I have to patch my kernel for it to work. Damn. I have to patch my video drivers. Still not working. Hmmm, let me check about patching something else.
Still not working. OH YEAH! That is right. I brag so much about linux running on a P100 that my linux rig is a $200 piece of shit PC.
Run Apache on you POS linux box and be happy.
OH, and to any of your retarded bastards that think you can reverse engineer DirectX to run on linux, guess what. As soon as ANYONE has a halfway working copy, microsoft is gonna change it. Which means any copying of the APIs will be at least 2 versions back.
OHHHH what stunning graphics then.
Now, if you don't think Wine is an emulator, please post a definition of emulate for which Wine doesn't qualify.
Still no response. I guess that means you couldn't come up with one.
Dinivin
In stage two you write an implementation of the API, coding happens here. Windows is just an implementation of the Win32 API, WINE is another implementation. Windows came out first, but had WINE been ready before Windows, you can bet nobody would call Windows a WINE emulator.
Why not just have a machine with Windows on it to run the Windows stuff and a linux box to run the rest? Microsoft will just change the API the minute these folks get a foothold. Besides, WINE hasn't exactly been the fastest thing in the world either. I'm no supporter of Microsoft, but at the same time if you think a game running on MS's platform is worthwhile then just hold your nose and use it.
Machines are cheap, and the only thing I use my Windows machine for these days IS games. If I have to do anything real and important I just use my beowolf cluster of forty machines. You can't get a VCS compile of 2 million gates on a silly MS driven machine anyways, but you sure can play Diablo II (if you don't mind the crashes!).
Fast machines, powerfull AI, impulsive invention,... All I lack is a good espresso machine!
I'd pay a monthly donation for the CODE.
once the code is made, its made, and its mine.
If you use Linux, please help development of Autopac