It seems that you're using an outdated browser. Some things may not work as they should (or don't work at all).
We suggest you upgrade newer and better browser like: Chrome, Firefox, Internet Explorer or Opera

×
avatar
Romulus: Here is a totally unscientific picture proving the fact.

Love your "totally unscientific" proof.
But don't give ideas of demonstration to Microsoft please... :p
Post edited July 09, 2009 by DarthKaal
avatar
TheJoe: Legal? How? If there's legal problems adding support for another OS then there must be problems adding it for Windows. There's no difference at all.
avatar
Aliasalpha: I assumed that meant the whole decompiling the software thing so it can be re-coded to run in the wildlands where direct x is merely a legend

There's no legal issue; you don't need to decompile software. For a few reasons:
1. Any game that runs in DosBox on Windows is compatible with DosBox on Linux with no modification. (Unless GOG has been adding special features to the Windows DosBox that haven't transferred across to Linux or something)
2. A lot of older Windows games run using Wine, a Windows compatibility layer. Many software companies (Including Google) have been using it to release Linux "ports" of their software. I've never heard of Microsoft bugging anyone about it, and I don't think they'd have any legal standing if they did.
3. Decompiling software to port it to another operating system is close to unheard of. It'd likely take way more time and resources than GoG has. There *would* be legal issues with it.
===
Alas, Google is talking about using this on ARM-based netbooks. DosBox and Wine won't help much there, unless you get an x86 emulator running underneath them (which would be fairly slow on a netbook). Games which use interpreters such as SCUMM (think Monkey Island) should be able to run as long as the interpreter has a port (SCUMM runs on anything), but a fairly substantial amount of the GOG catalog won't be compatible.
Actually, I'm not even sure you'll be able to use anything but web applications in Chrome OS, so we may be further limited to browser games.
Edit: Well, ok. Maybe their deals with software houses are only good for selling stuff on Windows or something like that. I suppose there's probably non-technical legal issues attached to the thing.
Post edited July 10, 2009 by JamesGecko
avatar
Aliasalpha: Yeah I suppose thats a fair point, they could manage to make a vastly cheaper product with this OS in mind but would creating a completely new line be justified financially? Specs wise it could bridge the gap between netbook & PDA but is there really a market for that when netbooks are already pretty cheap given what they give? The linux version of the EeePC 701 os within the price range of practically everyone I've ever known

The markets they are looking to get these netbooks into are not likely places anyone you know lives. They are talking about underdeveloped countries for these machines, not the "civilized world". In places like that, where the individual income is far lower than yours or mine (well, maybe not mine, currently unemployed), even the cheapest current netbook is far too expensive.
Oh yes the OLPC market is certainly a good target for this sort of thing
avatar
JamesGecko: There's no legal issue; you don't need to decompile software. For a few reasons:
1. Any game that runs in DosBox on Windows is compatible with DosBox on Linux with no modification. (Unless GOG has been adding special features to the Windows DosBox that haven't transferred across to Linux or something)

Good point, since linux has mostly gravitated towards the RPM style packages, it shouldn't be TOO hard to adapt the dosbox/scummvm games to install there as long as they can be made to be as compatible and simple to run as the windows analogue and don't rely on a dozen obscure dependant rpms.
avatar
JamesGecko: 2. A lot of older Windows games run using Wine, a Windows compatibility layer. Many software companies (Including Google) have been using it to release Linux "ports" of their software. I've never heard of Microsoft bugging anyone about it, and I don't think they'd have any legal standing if they did.

Well thats just running the windows version, if it works then thats good for the linux user, if it doesn't then stiff
Running stuff NATIVELY in linux was what I was referring to and it would need a hell of a lot of work for far too small a market segment for it to be financially viable.
Post edited July 10, 2009 by Aliasalpha
avatar
Aliasalpha: Good point, since linux has mostly gravitated towards the RPM style packages...

I wouldn't say that. There are just as many, if not more distros using the Debian package manager now (DEB packages), thanks to all the Ubuntu-based distros out there. Either way, it shouldn't be hard at all to create the packages, at least in terms of the ScummVM/DOSBox games. The only problem is, since there are different package managers out there for Linux with no clear standard, it might mean maintaining separate RPM, DEB and plain old tar.gz packages to cover every possible Linux configuration. That might be way more hassle than it is worth, for those few people who actually use Linux.
Probably the point is that there's not enough demand for linux stuff to justify diverting people to the job
Unfortunately, you are probably very right.
Well according to the all knowing and occasionally correct wikipedia, Linux variations acount for 1.2% of the market. By the look of that graph, it'd make more sense to support mac first.
Post edited July 10, 2009 by Aliasalpha
Uhm, you know what? All this talking about FOSS OSes made me wanting to install and play with Ubuntu. I've got no reason to go for a deformed OS instead of a serious one after all, even if they are both free :-P
When I said "legal issues" I meant that publishers and other rights holders would have to agree to it. I don't want to go into the details and accidentally disclose any confidential data so that'll have tobe enough from me. :)
avatar
Tirpitz: When I said "legal issues" I meant that publishers and other rights holders would have to agree to it. I don't want to go into the details and accidentally disclose any confidential data so that'll have tobe enough from me. :)

TBH after doing a little research and what has been said within this topic, it sounds like the OS is not really for gamers, just the curious or out of pocket.
avatar
Tirpitz: When I said "legal issues" I meant that publishers and other rights holders would have to agree to it. I don't want to go into the details and accidentally disclose any confidential data so that'll have tobe enough from me. :)

Curses! Another cunning plan to see behind the scenes of GOG has been foiled!
avatar
Tirpitz: When I said "legal issues" I meant that publishers and other rights holders would have to agree to it. I don't want to go into the details and accidentally disclose any confidential data so that'll have tobe enough from me. :)
avatar
Aliasalpha: Curses! Another cunning plan to see behind the scenes of GOG has been foiled!

Damn! And we were so close! We''ll have to try harder next time.
I hate to say it but its looking like we might have to resort to asking nicely...
there are several linux distros that boot really quick... DSL is supposed to be under 6 seconds, and puppy linux and a few others are also well under 20.* *actual results may vary.
I used to dual boot ubuntu and xp, and while ubuntu was much nicer to use, and i loved the ease of installing new software, the fact i often wanted to play games or use illustrator meant i usually booted into XP. So i ended up never using ubuntu. :-(
I was thinking about a dual boot with a lightweight linux for web browsing, but then i got vista... which boots so much faster than XP. And if i use the hibernate mode, starts almost instantaneously. So i never tried them.
--
As for ChromeOS... its an interesting idea, and it'd allow much lower spec machines to perform decent functions (though DSL etc can already do that, so it'd more about polish and brand).
The fact they've already said that they ARENT looking for software makers to support it means its gonna be almost 100% online services... OS = Chrome.
That's an interesting idea... though i wonder about offline modes, etc... Suck to be stuck in a connection blackspot. ;-)
It might mean they are going for a hybrid between the iphone/googlephone and a netbook... something seriously small, thin and lite. little power or storage, just a screen, browser and keyboard.. and everything else online.