Expert Opinions On Linux Gaming's Future 411
jg21 writes "Following
on from yesterday's Slashdot coverage of the idea to launch a games-based Linux
distro, LinuxWorld Magazine has held a Gaming Round Table involving Chris DiBona, Ryan
Gordon, Timothee Besset, Gavriel
State, and Joe Valenzuela about where Linux
currently stands and how it will one day become a premier gaming platform. 'It
became perfectly clear to me that most of the technological issues are already
solved, and that the others won't take too long to fix once the game publishers
really get into the mix,' reports Dee-Ann LeBlanc, Gaming Industry Editor for
LinuxWorld, who coordinated the round table. Well worth reading."
Where's the games at? (Score:5, Insightful)
Sokoban and Mahjongg only get you so far..
OpenGL exists on Linux, what else are game developers missing?
John Carmak (Score:3, Insightful)
For me... (Score:3, Insightful)
Isn't it a market issue...? (Score:4, Insightful)
A big problem I see with Linux as a mainstream gaming platform is that there is no significant market to tempt those developers with no extra money to burn...
I speak myself as a former game developer (now on the academic side of the world)... how would you convince me to develop for linux if I have no extra money??
--krahd
Re:Where's the games at? (Score:2, Insightful)
Spread the word.
Re:Where's the games at? (Score:5, Insightful)
There might be some truth to "If you build it, they will come" but in reality, unless there are an awful lot of people clamoring for the ballpark, it's not gonna happen.
As a Linux Noob... (Score:1, Insightful)
Re:Where's the games at? (Score:5, Insightful)
Also, ati and Nvidia haven't released open source drivers. It would be so much easier for the average person if the kernel could come with those video drivers already loaded in.
Re:Where's the games at? (Score:5, Insightful)
falvious
Editor
Linuxgaming.net [linuxgaming.net]
stuck (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Where's the games at? (Score:4, Insightful)
What we'd end up with would be about ten diferent projects, each of which does about one tenth what DirectX does. Then the project members would fight over which of the ten is the best and which one the other nine should be rolled into.
Re:Ths single most important requirement (Score:3, Insightful)
Vote with your wallet. (Score:4, Insightful)
I totally agree. The single biggest hinderance to seeing more games running natively on linux is the perception (and likely fact) that there's no money in it. It's for this reason that I subscribe to Transgaming, Bought Neverwinter Nights (and sent them a letter explaining why I picked their game and thanking them), and have copies of games from (some defunct) companies that I dont even play, but whose development I thought it was important to support.
Just keep supporting the folks doing a good job.
---
Jedimom.com [jedimom.com], picking out a thermos for you.
Re:Isn't it a market issue...? (Score:1, Insightful)
Key word here being traditionally. I have the feeling that these days the gaming industry is being driving increasingly by large developers.
Even more worrysome is that PC gaming is definatly in decline and consoles are becoming more and more prevalent. Even Doom 3 by ID, once the kings of cross plateform gaming, will have coop only on the XBOX.
If trends continue and consoles become the most important plateforms for gaming, I don't see that Linux has any real use. I can tell you right now that Microsoft has no need for Linux on the XBOX so Linux won't get anywhere there. Sony and Nintendo will probably just continue using whatever system they currently use. There is no need of a full unix type OS for consoles.
In my opinion, Linux should focus on what it's good at, UNIX workstations, and stop trying to be everything for everyone. It's not a sin not to use Linux after all.
Supporting Direct3D & OpenGL (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Where's the games at? (Score:5, Insightful)
OpenGL is perfectly fine, not to mention the fact that the existance of OpenGL apps on Windoze makes it easier to port apps and games...but to be honest, the existance of OpenGL on Linux has nothing to do with games and everything to do with 3D Modeling. OpenGL is just how it's done and the fact that there is legacy hardware support for OpenGL means that it will probably remain the low-level standard for 3D Linux apps.
will they make a profit? (Score:2, Insightful)
So the question is can the games be sold on a *nix platform. Yes people do pay for *nix software, and people do make money off it, but can *nix games generate the types of profit that will attract the top game developer? Even if the engines are cheap or free, even if *nix market share rise to 20%, is this enough of a customer base to warrant the effort?
Then there is the question of marketing entertainment on a platform that potentially has no possibility of viable copy protection.
Just to be clear, I think that *nix products in general can be sold and generate a profit. However, games and the like seem to follow a more complex set of economic rules.
Re:Isn't it a market issue...? (Score:3, Insightful)
It's not going to be a one-step process either, we're really going to have to work at it.
One way is resources. Suppose the major distros could have a "mode" dedicated to fullscreen OpenGL games. With generally more effecient use of resources in Gnu/Linux as opposed to windows the guys that just have to have that extra 3 frames per second will find it in Gnu/Linux. There's always a small percentage of players that are competing for maximum FPS no matter how useless a pissing contest it is. If all the people winning that contest are running Gnu/Linux, more of those types will turn towards Gnu/Linux since it becomes a necessary tool to compete.
Often games are released on Gnu/Linux as a server only version, no playable client. A lot of server maintainers choose the Gnu/Linux server over the windows server because of stability and features. Gnu/Linux servers often end up with more features.
That's the thing. If we already have this fantastic environment for developers, then why are we worrying about the developers? Get the gamers over here. Let's not forget that one of the massive drivers behind the gaming industry's profit is the fact that games are competitive. If we really want Gnu/Linux to be a viable gaming platform, by attracting developers, which are attracted by gamers, then what do we have to do?
The answer is so simple I shouldn't even have to write this length of a post.
The answer is we must use Gnu/Linux to give gamers a competetive edge on the games we _DO_ have.
If we can do that, they'll come. And they'll bring their friends.
Then we just keep doing that, for every game we get, until we have all of them.
Binary Incompatibility (Score:5, Insightful)
While we tend to blame the problem on Linux's small marketshare, I think Ryan is right here in that binary compatibility has as much, if not more to do with it. Compared to Windows, it would seem that things get broken more often in Linux, both application and driver wise, and that no one from the glibc guys to Linus himself want to really support this kind of compatibility in fear that it will undermine the OSS movement. How is an industry that needs binary compatibility for games and drivers alike supposed to survive without it?
As a developer... (Score:5, Insightful)
Further, Linux editions of games lose money. Quake3 for Linux sold dismally, while people were buying the Windows version enough to be dunking the CDs in their coffee. And the Linux client was released first: if ever there was an opportunity for a killer-app game to help boost Linux, that was a great time.
Loki went out of business by doing the smart thing: bootstrapping itself with porting Triple-A titles from Windows, to earn some cash and develop a library to live on. Who's going to look at the Linux market and see it as viable when id and Loki can't make a good go of it?
And Linux users are habituated to not paying for Linux software, as a rule. Not that they don't, and not that there aren't vertical markets where people are paying good money for Linux apps, but the OSS community is, well, a hard community to pry money out of.
I say this as a developer of Windows games, who runs Macs at home and who has compiled a few Linux kernels in the past. Developers have enough to do to create a modern game while taking advantage of the assistance of things like DirectX: taking on the burden of developing the same thing without that help, for a community that likes their software free (both kinds of free),... that's a lot to expect.
The bootable Distro... (Score:5, Insightful)
Honestly, if I were a games developer looking at the Linux market seriously, there is one feature which would really draw me in: the ability to provide a bootable distribution on the game CD.
One of the biggest headaches of game developers is trying to test their game on a sufficiently large subset of available hardware and software configurations to insure it will work properly. This isn't an issue on Consoles, which is one (not the only, but a big one) of the issues they are so popular to develop for. Having a bootable distro on the game CD gives the developer many of the advantages of both Console and PC:
Given the size of modern games, DVD distros are more likely than CD distros, but the concept is identical.
The bootable game CD/DVD has the potential to drastically reduce developer costs associated with modern games, and merge the best features of PC and Console gaming, with few drawbacks. I expect to see game makers venture into Linux in this area first.
-Erik
A specialized distro requires its own focus (Score:5, Insightful)
Being a developer myself, having used UNIX clones for more than one decade, and worked in the videogames industry, I know it's tempting to see the whole Free/Open Source software available as reusable code for just about any kind of project and think about software as some sort of Swiss Army knife.
But, the truth of the matter is, the usage patterns of a gamer are completely different from any other type of user, either from a technological and/or psychological perspective. We even tend to think of games as content in the same way as audio or video, when in fact, games are very demanding applications. That's not necessarily a bad thing, but the usability of games, their GUIs, the APIs and hardware support are not a priority and you'll see just about any of the so-called "games distro" using mostly the same software as a regular one, complete with KDE, GNOME and whatnot.
There should be only a handful of games-oriented distros, made with forks of every relevant component, but tailored exclusively for the needs of games and include no non-games related software inside. X, OpenGL, SDL and other libraries and APIs, Hardware Detection & Driver Support may seem obvious to have, but why do we need whole collections of shells, fonts, window managers or even locales? Why even the same init and authentication processes as desktop-oriented distros? Most games need to have their own, custom support for these things anyway, so the unnecessary, duplicate stuff should be removed.
Small, specialized software is better in many ways, so that the focus can be on the hardware support and the robustness of needed engines, APIs and libraries. Only then a games developer can maximize resources and focus on solving games' bugs during beta testing, and spend less time on issues with other unrelated, bloated components.
A tiny, modular LiveCD distribution is ideal for games because software diversity and versioning is better controlled, but should not be mandatory, and because the OS components can be under a free license, software houses can launch their products with the same codebase without any problem and make them either bootable or installable. Hell, some can even make professional SDKs out of it and license it to other developers.
Simply put, making a desktop-oriented distro, then just adding some drivers and some games and claiming it's a "games distro", doesn't take advantage of the technical superiority the free software community and, as a gamer, doesn't make it attractive to me, as in every distro there's some learning curve and fine tuning involved. "Damn! I just want to play a friggin' game!"
<RANT>It's a shame we're not showing of any real world usability advantages over videogame consoles or Windows-based games.</RANT>
Re:Where's the games at? (Score:5, Insightful)
I think you're missing something - to the majority of computer users, setting up a dual-boot system or doing pretty much anything along those lines is scary, complicated, and unless they have a geek friend or extremely precise help, dangerous to their system(s). Hell, i'm willing to bet that most people don't even understand how data is stored on their drives, let alone the concept of partitions.
And even if you do somehow get a casual gamer to install Linux, what is there to play? Sure, there's Quake, the UT series, NWN, and a relative handful of other games, but that won't keep forever. And that's IF the person even likes any of the games available in the first place.
And the free games included with many distros are in the same boat - as someone said in the previous thread, it creates excitement when you see the huge list available, then it slowly dawns on you that it's (almost) all board/card games and mediocre clones.
Conversely, get more games included like Frozen Bubble and a few others, and there might begin to be a chance of holding someone's interest.
Direct X (Score:4, Insightful)
Sony and API's (Score:3, Insightful)
Perhaps this applies equally well to Nintendo
Re:Binary Incompatibility (Score:2, Insightful)
I think compiler/IDE optimisation might be a bigger issue for small shop developers. Is gcc as slow to compile as it sounds from TFA?
Re:Where's the games at? (Score:0, Insightful)
This is where I stopped reading.
Re:The bootable Distro... (Score:3, Insightful)
The basic problem is that the publisher of a bootable game has to support not just a single binary, but a whole operating system, bootloader, etc. Not going to happen. Such support could possibly be outsourced, but it still costs money.
People will expect tech support if the publisher is shipping an OS - after all, any software problem is their fault. At the moment, Linux users neither expect nor receive any support for games, and we like it that way as long as it gets us the goods.
Re:Where's the games at? (Score:3, Insightful)
While it's true that the drivers need to be installed for windows as well, keep in mind that most windows users are usually an admin user. Also, it's done through the command line in Linux, whereas in windows it's all done through the GUI.
Also, you entirely forget that the Linux kernel is free and updates more frequently. With Windows, you really have to buy a new version.
I've installed the NVidia drivers multiple times, and I've gotten errors that the common gamer probably wouldn't be able to fix (I consider myself a Linux newbie, but I still have some computer saavy).
Re:Where's the games at? (Score:5, Insightful)
You're right. There is not an autoexec file. However there is a file called
Change this line:
id:5:initdefault:
To This
id:3:initdefault:
If that seems cryptic, read the comments in the file that tells you exactly what that means (has to do with run levels).
Now I'm not asking for help right now because I don't need it right now. However these things aren't where I'd look for them, so as far as I'm concerned they aren't where they should be.
Riiiiggght. If its not on the C:\ drive it must be wrong.
I'm not saying this couldn't be a little easier. Not sure why X has to come down in the first place. (Restarting X is ok, but bringing it down to install the driver?) But it doesn't have to be the same as what you're used to in order to be the right way of doing things.
Re:Where's the games at? (Score:2, Insightful)
Specifically, the question titled "What might the linux community do in order to change the thinking of the games industry?"
Some salient points: most game publishers want a minimum 50,000 unit commitment. http://counter.li.org/ estimates current linux deployment at 18 million. The 50 thousand target clocks in at 0.27% user saturation. That is anything but impossible.
The speaker goes on to say that smaller, independent game houses are 'thrilled' to see even 1,000 sales, and this should be financial motivation enough to go to a platform.
I'm not so sure about that second point, but another speaker goes on to second the 50,000 number as a target.
Re:Where's the games at? (Score:5, Insightful)
Indeed, Linux has a problem there. Consider a common Windows gamer. Why would he be interested in even installing linux to give it a try? It's not like Linux is going to improve his gaming experience. Installing an OS that sometimes even geeks have problems with is not exactly what a gamer wants to spend his day doing either. It doesn't matter if linux is free... they want something they can install and use with two or three mouse clicks... they don't even dream about using the keyboard to tell the PC to do something (other than move the player around the screen).
As good as Linux is for some kinds of works, it is still ages behind when it comes to desktop computing. But a great effort is being made to improve on this side too.
My suggestion is for linux developers to work on making easier installers, less complicated interfaces and sometimes more self-configuring applications. Having default configurations that make the linux experience more user friendly and such, without having to go through the hassle of setting up things an "ignorant" user wouldn't care about.
But that's just my opinion,
Diego Rey
Missing: Linux Gamers. No real market exists. (Score:4, Insightful)
What is missing? The Linux gamers are missing. Now calm down everyone, this is a serious point. The Linux game market is not the number of Linux users who would buy a Linux based game. That is too simplistic. The real Linux game market is the number of Linux users who would buy a Linux based game and would never buy the Windows version, would never dual boot or emulate.
The fact is that Linux users who dual boot or emulate are already customers. The developer has no financial incentive to do a Linux version, it would not generate any new money with these users. It would merely replace a Windows sale with a Linux sale. This does not rule out developers doing Linux games for non-financial reasons, like id.
When so called "experts" discuss the future of Linux gaming, speak only of the number of Linux desktops and ignore the dual boot/emulation issue, they have lost some credibility IMHO.
Linux and Mac not comparable, dual boot/emulation (Score:4, Insightful)
The only way it might happen in the short term (Score:2, Insightful)
Game company A makes a windows game and sells a few million copise. Game publisher B sees this, pays company A to let them port the game and company C to do the actual porting.
The mac publisher (Like Aspyr, Macplay, or Destineer) has to pay for the game license, and for the porting company (Westlake, Omnigroup, or a few others) so that they can finally sell a few thousand copies of the game to mac users. In addition, of course, to paying royalties on the sales they DO make (in addition to the initial licensing fee) and support for the mac version.
Most ports require very little effort by the PC developers and publishers, but a LOT of effort and capital by the porting publisher themselves. This is why Loki went out of business. A hit with a 5% install base will give you just about enough money to pay for your next release. That's a really tough way to sustain development.
What Linux needs (and mac needs more of) are native, top-quality developers making mac and Linux first games. Ambrosia Software comes to mind on the mac; although they use a shareware business principal, their games are easily on the same level as most commercial offering. Bungie (of Halo fame/infamy) started out as the Mac's most popular/famous developer before they began first cross-developing with windows, and then being purchased by Microsoft for XBox development.
Companies like this are equivalent to exclusive releases to consoles. You have to have games that you can't get any other way.
What linux needs is developers making great linux games. Games that make windows gamers install linux just to play in the same way people buy an Xbox to play Halo.
Re:Where's the games at? (Score:2, Insightful)
Seriously, if the developers had half the power in Open GL that DX9 has the standard would be used more, but as it is it has become stagnant due to the constant bitching that is done on the groups meetings, and all because they want to use their own propriety code, so they can charge the others.
I am sick of the bullshit... I just want to have the games, and then I can lose windows.
I want the EU as part of their Monoply agreement to require MS to release some of their old code to the public domain, screw the Win code, I want the DX code from like version 7 or 6 and earlier.
Re:Where's the games at? (Score:5, Insightful)
Riiight. Because Lightwave, Maya, Softimage, and all the other top of the line 3d rendering packages use directx.. oh wait, no they don't. they all use OpenGL because directx doesn't support half the things they need to do highend modeling.
I think.. (Score:4, Insightful)
Ofcourse, Linux can be worked on to make it a a stable gaming platform - but the way its being portrayed.. its like they want it to be THE gaming platform.. a replacement.... which means the enterprise software will run on one OS and the games on another
Re:Where's the games at? (Score:3, Insightful)
1. Never Quest (Ever Crack, Ever Quest). It doesnt work right out of the box. You ever see a common user hop into a command prompt to get things done??? try to explain compiling a program to run a program half as well as it did before he left windows.
2. Geek appeal. I actually know a person that will not try linux because he doesnt want to be labeled a geek.
3. Hardware support. I still have hardware that I cant use... and I dont have the time to try and code a driver (and fail miserably).
4. I just bought a dell with MS on it already.... if it works (it does what I want it to do), then why fix it?
5. My wife's company uses a lot of MS publisher.... Is there an open souce equivelant?
There are many reasons not to switch from windows to linux.
Mod me down for trolling for all I care, these are true for the general populus. Knoppix is a good start, as is the SuSE live CD, but we still have a long way to go.
BTW, I haven't ran windows for 4 years now and am glad to be free.
PS. If you guys are having troubles getting people to try linux, maybe its your approach and not the software. The software can be the best thing in the world, but if you can't make it sound L337 or cool, interesting, fun, and usable... then you will never get past the stigmata that GNU/Linux has
Getting the gamers (Score:5, Insightful)
Who am I? A fairly typical or above average Gamer/Windows power user, i'd say. Probably above average, considering I built my computer from scratch (yay!), and recognize a handful of Linux buzzwords. Anyways, there are generally four things I use my computer for:
-Games
-Teh intarnet
-Art (PS/PSP, Maya/Max)
-Music (omgomgomg, MP3s!)
I run my quiet little Windows XP(home) box. It has plenty of the usual bandaid programs on it (Kerio/AVG/AdAware), and I try to stay away from M$ programs as much as possible (IE is only for emergencies, and I buried OE somewhere so deep and dark i'm not sure I could find it again.
So I guess that pretty much puts me dead center in the "games 4 linux" crosshairs. In theory, I should be a pretty simple convert, right? Err, actually... actually, I'm actually very resistant to Linux (please don't stone me untill after my speech, kthnx). Why? Well, lets take a trip through stupid gamer land:
Starting off with Linux in general...
-Linux? Thats that confusing OS, right? Sorry, don't have time to hunt for packages/screw with command lines/read a million help files/troll forums for answers to stupid questions. Especially not asking for help. I just know i'll get told 'RTFM' when i'm having a problem... *sigh*. If only Linux was more user friendly! Whats a rm -fr / anyways?
-Distro? Oh, gee... I don't know. There are so many! Knoppix is just for peeking. RedHat and Mandrake... aren't those "newbie" distros? I don't want to be called a newbie, so no thanks. Gentoo? Thats like, REALLY hard, right? Debian sounds fun, but I don't think i'm that smart. SuSE? Isn't that for businesses and stuff? Oh, and that Slackwhatever sounds like, impossible. Lycorsis and Lindows... pfft, I want to get AWAY from Windows, thanks. Xandros? Whats that?
Wow.. there are so many choices! None of them seem like they're targeted at ME though. And anyways... why so many? I don't want to have to choose... what if I miss out on something! Some feature that distro X has that my distro Y doesn't but I really really want? Man, i'm really frustrated and confused right now. At least with Windows its all the same...
-My hardware... um, will it all work? Drivers for my Radeon 9700 Pro? Its a GREAT gaming card... I spent a lot of money on it too. No drivers, no deal. Oh, and are there audio drivers for my sound (nForce Soundstorm) too? Ah yes, and the last thing... my entire harddrive (almost full) is NTFS. I don't want to loose 70gb of information just to use Linux! Oh, and whats all this stuff about USB and plug and play? Shouldn't that just, like, work?
-My software. Ack! I have so much of this! Lets see... I need web utilities. Already got Firefox and Thunderbird, so thats good. I'll need an FTP proggy too (I use smartFTP right now), oh, and of course, Kazaa. Some benchmarking and utility programs would be nice too (I AM a gamer after all). Soo, like Sandra, Prime, cpuz, FRAPS, etc. Oh, and I need all my pretty desktop customization programs (or equivalent) to make things look like I want... ObjectBar, Sysmetrix, Rainlendar, and LogonStudio is what I run ATM. Then i'll need media stuff... I like Sonique, and i'm trying to get more skill with Photoshop (big one), Paint Shop Pro, Maya, and Max. Oh oh, and i'll need Nero or something to burn CDs with. Ok, now onto games... yes, lots of games. I have a *ton* of classics. Everything from System Shock to Scorched Earth. They barely run under Windows though... I doubt they have Linux equivalents, though maybe WineX can figure them out? Old games can
This was "interesting"? Not really. (Score:4, Insightful)
Loki took on the porting or support of 21 different titles at a tune of at least $20-50k per title and royalties proportionate to if someone was selling an actual Windows game.
Loki went about the process of doing the actual publishing of the games in a manner that one would expect of a Windows publisher- thereby making the break-even levels nigh impossible to achieve.
Loki went about doing incredible, amazingly stupid things like ordering 50k units of CD's and those little metal tins for Q3:A, causing a delay in the ship date, creating impossible margins on the product when they should have ordered about 5k of the CD's and used DVD boxes to cut costs and get the official Linux version in people's hands in about the same timeframe as the official release (So that people wouldn't have went and bought the Windows version and "patched" it with the binaries set from Id...).
Re:As a developer... (Score:2, Insightful)
Not necessarily. This all depends on how it's implemented. Sure, you're going to undergo some performance hit, the question is whether or not it is significant or not. The abstraction should still be built very close to the target API - there's no reason to have it support everything and the kitchen sink - but several of the more common APIs have enough similarities (case in point, notice how Direct3D became more and more "OpenGL-like" during it's evolution) that you can primarily target one, but keep one or more others in mind while doing the design.
I'm not saying that you _have_ to support every API under the sun from the start, merely that it is quite possible to have a design such that a game is not tied to a given API to the point of a port being a major effort.
Cases in point - Quake 2 and Unreal. Both supported multiple renders at release. Quake 2 had both a software and OpenGL render. Unreal had a software and Direct3D render (and an OpenGL renderer too). Without some level of abstraction internal in the engine this would have been a major effort to do. As it is, it still isn't trivial, at shipping. Here, I am talking about merely designing an engine such that it allows for easier porting in the future.
As a side note - if you want to look at bad examples of this, check out Ultima Ascension. Ran fine on a 3DFX card, but the Direct3D performance was abysmal. May have been resolved in later patches (I don't know as I had a Voodoo 2 at the time), but at shipping it was pointless to even try on anything by a 3DFX card.
Re:Yay! (Score:2, Insightful)
- email client notifies me of new mail
- voice chat/IP Telephony app
- I want to be able to share files
- I want to be able to quickly switch to another application and then back to the game.
I still think that this could work, but then you would have to be able to play the game not only by booting the livecd but from your installed distro too. I once had a Gentoo Linux UT2003 Demo LiveCD, which worked like a breeze (and in fact introduced me to gentoo
Re:GCC vs. Visual Studio (Score:2, Insightful)
You'd better get used to CVS because when you get out into the big bad world you'll find that it's fairly ubiquitous, even in 100% Windows shops like where I'm currently contracting...
Bob
Another benefit to DirectX over OpenGL... (Score:2, Insightful)
OpenGL: PC and Linux
DirectX: PC and XBox
From a perspective of sales, there is really no question where the profit is.
Re:Where's the games at? (Score:2, Insightful)
i linux, you have to boot into x so you can have a web browser to use to download the drivers (and dont give me any bs about lynx, typical ps users couldnt handle it); then you have to quit x (and i didnt even know how to do that at first, and found it was a pain in the ass to install drivers because of it) then you have to move to move to the right directory, run the driver program, enter the root password (assuming you started all this as a regular user) and restart x.
windows: download, double click, click click click; reboot.
see? slightly different, and you should know better. its hard enough to get a windows user to do even that much with comprehension most of the time.
Redhat Refugee (Score:2, Insightful)
I'm smart enough to build my own Win boxes from left-over parts (or brand-new when I'm rich) and troubleshoot for my entire family, so I should be able to handle it. Right???
It was like doing your fucking taxes. Looks simple, but it's a trap (heehee... Fark cross-over represent!) I was able to obtain and load Redhat9 and began to think "Linux is easy! Everyone is stupid but ME..."
Then I needed to install programs. As I continually search forums for definitions to all the buzz-words (Distro, Tarball, Root, etc...), I find more programs that I don't have (but need before I can install the original package).
So being a good little geek, I research and study and ask for help (only to be blasted for being stupid and told to "Go back to M$ if you want quick and easy, n00b!!!"). After finally getting through 107 installs so I can install the 1 thing I wanted, I find out that my hardware won't work with MythTV. Not now, not ever...
FF to an hour later... I've deleted all Linux partitions and have WinXP MCE 2004 installed and downloading the first of several updates. Now I wonder how the "N00b" OS of Linux kicked my ass (even though I was willing and able to do the research 98% of the world will not and cannot do) and have a hard time seeing how I'll have the time/energy/hardware/balls to try again in the future...
Too bad... I kinda liked the feeling of being out from under Bill's thumb...