Slashdot Mirror
Linux Has Better Windows Compatibility Than Vista
Several readers have written to tell us about one users rant in which he tells the story of being so frustrated with gaming on Windows Vista that he tried comparing gaming on Vista to that on Linux using Wine, with surprising results. "This post is clearly a bit biased. What shocked me though was how easy it was to find games that didn't run under Vista but did in Linux by using Wine or DOSBox. I'm not a huge gamer, so I don't have a huge collection of games to try out, but even still with just a few hours of frustrating work, I have been able to show that not only is Linux a reasonable alternative to Vista for gaming (XP is still king though), but also that Linux handles application failures more gracefully than Vista. Every game but Blackthorne crashed my Vista box, this didn't happen a single time under Linux."
Let's see, on my Vista machine now I have the following games, unmodified that still work perfectly well in Vista, even if one or two need running in compatibility Win XP mode. List includes:
Quake 1-3, Dungeon Keeper 1 & 2, Unreal (classic), C&C95, Red Alert.
I mean, if Vista can run a DirectX 4 game, 6 major DirectX versions later, that can't be bad. All power to wine if it can do it too, but to suggest Vista is awful with games is pushing it.
throw new NoSignatureException();
If you review four games, where all except one is fairly unknown, and you get Vista to crash three of these games, you should probably do one of the following: A) Try with games that aren't filled with bugs (may I suggest some more mainstream titles that have regular patches coming out), or B) Check your hardware for broken component.
And you should probably try a few more games than that to be able to draw any conclusions at all.
Just tried to install the first game on his list (Soldat) on my laptop running Vista 64 bit.
First run; no go. Soldat stops responding.
Start explorer, go to soldat directory, open soldat.exe properties. Set compatibility to Windows XP/SP2, disable Aero for this program, run as admin.
Second run; works like a charm. One more popup asking whether Soldat may access the network.
I'm not even going to bother and try the other ones. This guy should have done his homework.
Never underestimate the bandwidth of a station wagon full of tapes hurtling down the highway. -- Andrew S. Tanenbaum
I'd be comfortable declaring this the millenium of Linux on the desktop, i'd even go so far as to say century. Possibly the next decade could be the decade of Linux on the desktop. But I think it's too gradual a shift for there to be a single year we could look back on and say "that was it. that's when it all happened". This is assuming it happens at all of course.
Strangely, I've yet to hear a kind word from the normals in the real world. Maybe you missed the ASUS Eee PC and the Everex gPC that Walmart has been selling? Maybe this Linux thing isn't catching on quite as much as you think it is. Maybe. But one thing that is catching on is "anything but Vista". I personally will hang on to XP for as long as I can, and then I will at least invest a reasonable amount of time looking at Linux or Mac before making a final call on Vista. I've used it plenty at work and it's been nothing but pain for me so far. I understand that there are also those that love Vista, or find it's no worse than anything else on offer. However, I think it's probably fair to say that dissatisfaction with Vista is probably greater than with any other OS in a long time, and that will boost Linux conversions.
As much as I'd like to stand around and say "Haha" and post a Nelson pic, this article is extremely uninformed and biased. Cedega/Wine can do some great things, but really now, people still don't know how to set an individual .exe's properties for OS compatibility?
Also, I think the setup might have some effect here. A GeforceFX? Jeebus. If you expect reasonable performance on that, I don't know what rock you've been under.
Let us take a look at a definition of flamebait (wikipedia): Flamebait is a message posted to a public Internet discussion group, such as a forum, newsgroup or mailing list, with the intent of provoking an angry response (a "flame") or argument over a topic the troll often has no real interest in.
As a professional software developer I have a professional interest in the performance of OS-es, even when it comes to gaming. My message was in no way intended to provoke emotional response; I even replaced the names of the OS-es with placeholders to indicate my argument has nothing to do with the OS-es themselves, but with the methodology followed in the article. Please elaborate why my posting should be modded 'flamebait', for I fail to see a valid reason.
On the other hand you're saying it ISN'T news for nerds that games built to run on a prior version of Windows don't work in new one but do work on a totally different operating system?No, I have said no such thing whatsoever. If apps written for A run better on B, it is indeed news. The article however fails miserably in showing evidence for such a claim.
Let me guess. You don't think it's news that newer versions of Office won't open old word documents but Open Office will.My vision on another subject that is remotely related to the one we are discussing is irrelevant. Please stick to the issue you are debating.
Don't get me wrong, the choice of games (besides perhaps Civ 4) is questionable,Which was the point I was making, together with the fact that it is bad practice to (non-randomly) pick 5 out of a population of thousands and make assumptions based solely on those 5.
but make no mistake YOU are the one trolling.Lets take a look at a definition of a troll (wikipedia): An Internet troll, or simply troll in Internet slang, is someone who posts controversial messages in an online community, such as an online discussion forum, with the intention of baiting other users into an emotional response.
I fail to see how my post is controversial; I also fail to see any intention of provoking an emotional response. You simply calling my post 'trolling' has no relevance.
The author of the blog article has a point.The only point the author can make is that for his obscure and very small subset of all possible games, they run better on wine than on vista. My point is that that says absolutely nothing about vista in general.
Wenn ist das Nunstueck git und Slotermeyer? Ja! Beiherhund das Oder die Flipperwaldt gersput.
Rewrite Windows so it becomes more secure, be gone with legacy junk they said... So Microsoft almost did it but kept some huge legacy still working in Vista. Now they scream "Oh noes, our old legacy stuff breaks!"... Damned if they do, damned if they don't. These so called "Articles" are getting ridiculous, even for Slashdot. Yes, seriously!
Several readers have written to tell us about one users rant... Really? Several readers? Took time out of their day to write you to tell you about this one readers rant? OK, I'll check out the article. This must be good. What? Only four games tested, and by someone who is a self-professed non-gamer? Let's see what he had to say...
Game 1: Basically didn't work. Oh sure, he got Soldat running in WINE eventually, after tweaking, and gives the impression that it was unplayable. Vista 0 - Linux 0.
Game 2: Darwinia, patched to the latest version (a reasonable suggestion for any game, really, in this day and age) ran with a horrible frame rate in Vista, but "runs fine under Wine (even at a tolerable speed)" Not at "a normal" or "expected" framerate, but at "a tolerable speed." I have no idea what that means. We'll give him the benefit of the doubt on this one, but someone might want to share the fact that Darwinia is available in a native Linux version. Vista 0 - Linux 1.
Game 3: DOSBox under Vista hangs, and he says it's basically a DOSBox problem. Okay, fine...so he tries it in Linux and it also fails, though in a different way. In Vista he tries to shut off the sound in the config, and nothing, but in Linux he changes the config from SBPro to SB. I'd like to know, did he try that in Vista? (First rule of troubleshooting...assume nothing.) I don't think I can give Linux a point on this because there's just not enough information. Vista 0 - Linux 1.
Game 4: Civ 4. The author of the article says he's a big Civ fan, and frankly so am I. Great game series. He gets a message that indicates known compatibility issues, so tries to run it anyway (why not...might as well see what happens.) It hangs on him. Now, anecdotes are anecdotes, but my buddy and I have been playing the Civ games together for sometime, and he recently (within the last year) put Vista on his machine. Afterward we both purchased Civ 4 (I'm running it on XP.) He installed it, loaded it, and (drum roll)...it worked. No window claiming "known compatibility issues", it didn't hang his machine. It's not even a state of the art machine. We've been playing for several months now, and neither of us has had any issues with Windows "hanging", which suggests to me that there is more going on here than just a windows issue (even though windows could be involved.) He does say that after patching the game (there it is again), well, I'm not sure what he says.
Update: With the 1.61 patch, Civ4 no longer freezes, but it like in WineX, it does not recognize the cd labled "Play / Disc 2 when in the drive. An improvement, but still not good enough. I think he said it didn't work. Oh, and he could install in under Cedega and it wouldn't run. It wouldn't even install for him with Wine, "but at least it doesn't hang my machine."
Using highly refined comparitive techniques similar to those in the "rant", and given that my friend's experience running Civ under Vista has been completely smooth, I'm gonna give Vista a point on this one. Vista 1 - Linux 1.
Margin of error: 1000 games, either way. I don't care if one "handles application failures more gracefully than" the other. If I'm the average user who wants to game as is implied in the article, I will be as confused by nothing happening as I would be by the computer hanging and restarting. Looks like a tie to me.
Look, folks, I have no love for Vista (tried it, tested it, didn't like it), but this was about as scientific a test of Vista's compatibility as reading tea leaves.
And just to add 2 cents, I don't think any of those games were sold on the assumption that they would run in Vista, just because it's supposed to be backwards compatible.
I'm gonna go with flamebait on this one.
Do You Experiment?
Let's see: the article is titled "Linux has better Windows compatibility than Vista"; it's even in the url. Comparisons between operating systems have (traditionally) high emotional responses in discussion groups (I recall comp.os.*.advocacy newsgroups in the pre-www days). Making such a claim (os A > os B) while offering the worst possible 'evidence' (non random 5 out of thousands) can certainly be called trolling/flamebaiting.
I have clearly stated why I think this article is flamebait. You have still failed to give proper argumentation why my response is flamebait or trolling. In fact, on my question: 'why is this flamebait?' you answer: 'you called the article flamebait'. So in your logic, stating that something is flamebait is flamebait in itself?
I am not complaining, I am calling for valid arguments. You continue to fail to give them.
So the summary was bad. Why does that make the whole thing flamebait?Please, look at the title again. The title of TFA that is. The whole point the writer is making is that vista is worse than wine, because his non-randomly selected 5 games run better on wine. That makes it flamebait to me.
Your failures aren't my problem.Please stick to argumentation and stop picking on words. The message I am trying to get across to you is that you have not pointed out why my response is flamebait. 'I fail to see' is a friendly way of saying 'you did not make it clear'.
If you can't see why asking to mod/censor an article that might be of interest to others might provoke an emotional response, I don't see how I can help you.Ah, now we are getting somewhere. As you might know we slashdotters are not able to mod or censor articles. On regular occasions comments are given like 'nothing to see here, please move along' or '-1, Flamebait'. They are not ment to really censor the article, but comment on its newsworthyness. Such comments are lingua franca on slashdot, just like RTFA, IANAL or references to the goatse man. That you are emotionally provoked by such a statement surprises me, to say the least.
If new versions of windows are less compatible with even some software than Linux emulating an old version that is of interest to me, and I don't appreciate people like yourself trying to shout down the article.Well, if you do not appreciate that, than do not accuse me of things I clearly did not. Keep in mind you have NOT given any valid argument why my response should be modded flamebait, so I cannot reach any other conclusion than that you incorrectly accused me of something because you did not 'appreciate' what I said. I find that a bit sad.
Wenn ist das Nunstueck git und Slotermeyer? Ja! Beiherhund das Oder die Flipperwaldt gersput.