I know it's not free, but didn't SCO Taratella do this? It's now Propalms TSE, but it looks like it only provides a Windows server and multi-platform clients. Sad if so.
Presumably the MPAA/RIAA could garner up a few people and spend $21million "overnight", sacrificing 1 day of sales to mean that the other 364 days of the year would not be free of copyright. But that's tin foil hat stuff and requires that the long term gain be more than the short term loss and for the *AA to recognise that.
Or the MPAA/RIAA could just make a phone call, arrange for a wire transfer and be done with it without elaborate and expensive subterfuge. In the bigger picture, $21 million is insignificant.
The WTO is not looking at is a one business though they are looking at as economies. Its not like they have an army to go pacify a nation state that is not following the rules it agreed to abide by.
Cue US military invasion of Antigua in 3 . . . 2 . . .
I think its also a cautionary tale about these world governing bodies and making treaties. Our earliest founders warned us about getting into international entanglements. This is clear example of how these things don't always come out as planned. We might be strong arming China one week, but might have some rulings like these go against our interests another, and it makes us look like real ass hats when we try and argue these international bodies should be abide by one moment and than ignore them the next.
Yeah, it sucks when you must follow rules you agreed to, especially hwne you intended to use thoe rules to strong-arm others.
That's a bit deceptive. Microsoft contributed code needed for its VMs to host Linux, nothing more.
I don't see what's deceptive about it. You either contribute or you don't; they did.
They contributed code that only benefitted their product. The benefit is only generalized to the community if it encourages wider adoption and awareness of FOSS through exposure via their product, which it may.
If you don't like their product(s), don't purchase or use them. I don't.
I'm using an Intel i5-2400/16GB RAM with two GeForce 9800GTs for dual-head. Older tech, but only one year old to me. Why? For a bargain price, it works great for me and was a significant improvement over the AMD Athlon XP-3000/Geforce 6200 I was using.
Latest/Greatest hardware is nice, but expensive. I also tend to play older games like Quake, Unreal, COD, MOH which run great on more modern hardware.
Then they would have to update each of those libraries and be responsible for security patches to each one lest they be seen as a malware frontend.
Your silly idea is the common form on windows and is one of the things most wrong with it.
You are confusing packages of FOSS maintained by each distro with packages supplied by third-party commercial vebdors containing proprietary software. The rquirements for packaging and support are very different.
If Valve just wants to provide and support Steam on Ubuntu, that's fine with me. But they should be honest and call it "Steam for Ubuntu" because it's not "Steam for Linux".
I'm not a Fedora user and installed this in a VM this morning. The installer Ui was a shock and looks like crap, but it was no big deal to figure out. It was typical of all that RedHat/GNOME minimalist crap.
> How about doing it with a Steam download that runs on _any_ modern Linux?
Use alien to turn the deb package into a simple tarball.
Then use ldd to see what libraries you are missing.
There's no magic in this sort of thing: Lay down some files. Then lay down some more files to make sure the first set works. Perhaps throw up some advertising and a progress bar.
Chances are that "modern" Linuxen are already going to have what Steam needs since Linuxen are all ultimately the same upstream projects repackaged.
I can't run in on Mageia2 because it insists on glibc_2.15 and all Mageia provides is libc_2.14. Mageia 3 will provide libc_2.17 at least, so that won't be an issue and I've run it in the Mageia beta, so that again is not an issue. I suppose I could compile glibc_2.15 for Mageia2, but what magic does 2.15 provide that 2.14 does not that is needed by Steam? And needing complicated, user-unfriendly methods of running Steam on any modern Linux is not the way to make it a breakthrough product. This is also not about my "Linux skills". http://socuteurl.com/buzzycuddlefrog
My complaint is not that it can't be _made_ to run on other distros (it obviously can), but it shouldn't _need_ to be if they want to call it "Steam for Linux". Their internal debate is about their problem of supporting so many different packaging systems and making the distro install all the required-by-Steam versions of libraries. They resist providing their own libraries because of some assumed fear of "bloatware", but that approach would give them more control and better performance. I suspect it's more of an understandable desire to push some of the library support issues onto the distro itself. And I understand why they cannot statically compile proprietary software with FOSS libraries. They need to divorce themselves from any reliance on _any_distro if they want to call it "Steam for Linux". Because otherwise, it's not and it's not the breakthrough they claim it to be.
I'm fine if they only officially support ubuntu as long as they don't do too much ubuntu specific stuff. For example I think they still have no tray icon, only the indicator stuff. That's not so nice.
Those discussions seem to involve them trying to interact with each distro's package manager rather than them supplying updated versions of the libraries, but package managers are not designed to support dependencies for proprietary software like Steam; they are designed to support software that the distro provides.
They refer to providing all their own libraries as "bloatware", but I think it's the best choice since it gives them the most control and provides the most distro-agnostic experience. Modern gaming computers are probably not pressed for disk real estate.
ARCH already has it in AUR. So you can drop that off your list. I am also fairly confident I read something about rpms being made for fedora or instructions to do it yourself.
Maybe if installing packages for another distro is too hard for you, you should just stick to the supported one.
Installing packages for another distro is not hard for me. And I don't care to install Ubuntu.
The problem seems to be Steam's insistance on glibc_2.15. My Mageia2 system only provides glibc_2.14; I need to wait for Mageia 3 for a distro-supported glibc_2.15.
What miracle has 2.15 wrought that makes it essential for Steam? I suspect that it does nothing special and since steam is not FOSS, I can't recompile it to find out. But that would be OK if Steam would give me a way around this.
Slashdot Mirror
I'm just waiting for some Micrsoft shill to name Microsoft the "World's Most Trusted Internet Company For Privacy".
In 3 . . . 2 . . .
I know it's not free, but didn't SCO Taratella do this? It's now Propalms TSE, but it looks like it only provides a Windows server and multi-platform clients. Sad if so.
Presumably the MPAA/RIAA could garner up a few people and spend $21million "overnight", sacrificing 1 day of sales to mean that the other 364 days of the year would not be free of copyright. But that's tin foil hat stuff and requires that the long term gain be more than the short term loss and for the *AA to recognise that.
Or the MPAA/RIAA could just make a phone call, arrange for a wire transfer and be done with it without elaborate and expensive subterfuge. In the bigger picture, $21 million is insignificant.
The WTO is not looking at is a one business though they are looking at as economies. Its not like they have an army to go pacify a nation state that is not following the rules it agreed to abide by.
Cue US military invasion of Antigua in 3 . . . 2 . . .
I think its also a cautionary tale about these world governing bodies and making treaties. Our earliest founders warned us about getting into international entanglements. This is clear example of how these things don't always come out as planned. We might be strong arming China one week, but might have some rulings like these go against our interests another, and it makes us look like real ass hats when we try and argue these international bodies should be abide by one moment and than ignore them the next.
Yeah, it sucks when you must follow rules you agreed to, especially hwne you intended to use thoe rules to strong-arm others.
Just like similar drills conducted over Manhattan after 9/11.
"As Seen On TV"
I've done it before for the LULZ It runs everywhere!
Think of the possibilities!!
Then it can be rated PG. Boobs never hurt anybody.
That's a bit deceptive. Microsoft contributed code needed for its VMs to host Linux, nothing more.
I don't see what's deceptive about it. You either contribute or you don't; they did.
They contributed code that only benefitted their product. The benefit is only generalized to the community if it encourages wider adoption and awareness of FOSS through exposure via their product, which it may.
If you don't like their product(s), don't purchase or use them. I don't.
Executive Summary
If you have a paradox in a thought experiment, you can think your way out of it.
Or at least by Windows 10.
.....or 4chan.
I'm wait for the LULZ.
I'm using an Intel i5-2400/16GB RAM with two GeForce 9800GTs for dual-head. Older tech, but only one year old to me. Why? For a bargain price, it works great for me and was a significant improvement over the AMD Athlon XP-3000/Geforce 6200 I was using.
Latest/Greatest hardware is nice, but expensive. I also tend to play older games like Quake, Unreal, COD, MOH which run great on more modern hardware.
Then they would have to update each of those libraries and be responsible for security patches to each one lest they be seen as a malware frontend.
Your silly idea is the common form on windows and is one of the things most wrong with it.
You are confusing packages of FOSS maintained by each distro with packages supplied by third-party commercial vebdors containing proprietary software. The rquirements for packaging and support are very different.
If Valve just wants to provide and support Steam on Ubuntu, that's fine with me. But they should be honest and call it "Steam for Ubuntu" because it's not "Steam for Linux".
Maybe F18 should be considered VM only?
I had no probelm with F18 on VirtualBox.
OMG. A voice of sanity on Slashdot.
I'm not a Fedora user and installed this in a VM this morning. The installer Ui was a shock and looks like crap, but it was no big deal to figure out. It was typical of all that RedHat/GNOME minimalist crap.
Slashdot is rapidly degenerating into the Geek tab at FARK.
Not a problem since we'll all be running Windows 11 by then.
> How about doing it with a Steam download that runs on _any_ modern Linux?
Use alien to turn the deb package into a simple tarball.
Then use ldd to see what libraries you are missing.
There's no magic in this sort of thing: Lay down some files. Then lay down some more files to make sure the first set works. Perhaps throw up some advertising and a progress bar.
Chances are that "modern" Linuxen are already going to have what Steam needs since Linuxen are all ultimately the same upstream projects repackaged.
I can't run in on Mageia2 because it insists on glibc_2.15 and all Mageia provides is libc_2.14. Mageia 3 will provide libc_2.17 at least, so that won't be an issue and I've run it in the Mageia beta, so that again is not an issue. I suppose I could compile glibc_2.15 for Mageia2, but what magic does 2.15 provide that 2.14 does not that is needed by Steam? And needing complicated, user-unfriendly methods of running Steam on any modern Linux is not the way to make it a breakthrough product. This is also not about my "Linux skills". http://socuteurl.com/buzzycuddlefrog
My complaint is not that it can't be _made_ to run on other distros (it obviously can), but it shouldn't _need_ to be if they want to call it "Steam for Linux". Their internal debate is about their problem of supporting so many different packaging systems and making the distro install all the required-by-Steam versions of libraries. They resist providing their own libraries because of some assumed fear of "bloatware", but that approach would give them more control and better performance. I suspect it's more of an understandable desire to push some of the library support issues onto the distro itself. And I understand why they cannot statically compile proprietary software with FOSS libraries. They need to divorce themselves from any reliance on _any_distro if they want to call it "Steam for Linux". Because otherwise, it's not and it's not the breakthrough they claim it to be.
Because that's what they officially (I guess) support. I think valve has talked about making it more distribution agnostic in the future. http://steamcommunity.com/app/221410/discussions/0/846939854324291029/
Other distributions that are not supported will obviously repackage it. Archlinux has it in the AUR and it works fine. https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/steam/
I'm fine if they only officially support ubuntu as long as they don't do too much ubuntu specific stuff. For example I think they still have no tray icon, only the indicator stuff. That's not so nice.
Those discussions seem to involve them trying to interact with each distro's package manager rather than them supplying updated versions of the libraries, but package managers are not designed to support dependencies for proprietary software like Steam; they are designed to support software that the distro provides.
They refer to providing all their own libraries as "bloatware", but I think it's the best choice since it gives them the most control and provides the most distro-agnostic experience. Modern gaming computers are probably not pressed for disk real estate.
ARCH already has it in AUR. So you can drop that off your list. I am also fairly confident I read something about rpms being made for fedora or instructions to do it yourself.
Maybe if installing packages for another distro is too hard for you, you should just stick to the supported one.
Installing packages for another distro is not hard for me. And I don't care to install Ubuntu.
The problem seems to be Steam's insistance on glibc_2.15. My Mageia2 system only provides glibc_2.14; I need to wait for Mageia 3 for a distro-supported glibc_2.15.
What miracle has 2.15 wrought that makes it essential for Steam? I suspect that it does nothing special and since steam is not FOSS, I can't recompile it to find out. But that would be OK if Steam would give me a way around this.
You want them to focus on a smaller percentage of a small percentage that has a tendency to think "no closed source on my system, ever!!!!"?
Get over yourself.
Who is that? Fedora? SuSE? Mageia? ARCH? None of them have "no closed source" problems.
And it's not impossible to package software to run on a broader range of modern Linux distros. Other commercial vendors seem to be able to do it.
Until they offer more universal packaging, they should more accurately call it "Steam for Ubuntu".
How about doing it with a Steam download that runs on _any_ modern Linux?